230 réponses à ce sujet

[AndarianTD]

Rogue Unit wrote...

You've made up your mind then.  What do you hope to accomplish with your endless stream of negative posts?
You won't change anything and I doubt you'll discourage anyone from buying DA2. At this point you're wasting you're own time. You have the right to feel that way and say what you're saying I just dont see the point when no one who is already committed to the game really cares.

I agree, and at this point I think it's time to stop feeding the trolls.

/signoff

[Hollingdale]

I have a great idea how about Bioware just add a bunch of optional bars that don't really do anything but than you can fill up as you progress through the game? Then we'd have THE BEST part of Dragon Age 1 along with all the new sweet stuff!

[SirOccam]

Kordaris wrote...

Rogue Unit wrote...

Try as you will you're arguing an opinion and you're not going to win.

Win? This is a game?

Are you unfamiliar with the concept of "winning" an argument? It's when one side convinces the other to give up their case and switch sides, usually accomplished with superior logic and reasoning...okay so no, I don't suppose you would be familiar with that.

All I'm saying is that even with you not being able to choose your race
the game can still be awesome. Every game doesn't be exactly like DA:O
to be worth playing.

Well Dragon Age 1 was awesome because it allowed for interesting customisation of the PC. Dragon Age 2 will remove the elements that made Dragon Age 1 awesome. Instead it will have more combat, only one character to choose from(who looks and sounds ultra-cheesy), a terrible narrative(flashbacks!).There is nothing awesome about. It reminds me of God of War.

You've already decided you hate it, despite knowing almost nothing about it. We all get it. Nothing they can do will change your view, as you are so committed to hating it that you invent stuff to hate, and continue to spout ridiculousness that has been shown to be logically bankrupt time and time again.

Such as Hawke looking cheesy. How many times does it have to be said that you can change his appearance? You are NOT stuck with that appearance. Yet you just ignore that fact and it continues to turn up in almost all of your posts. And how do you know how he sounds? Were you at SDCC? Because otherwise, that's completely and totally in your imagination.

It's interesting that you've declared framed narratives to be "terrible." The master of literary devices has weighed in, everyone! Someone should tell Homer, Chaucer, Brontë, Shelley, and the makers of films like Amadeus and The Princess Bride that their work is terrible because "Kordaris" from the Internet says so.

Kordaris wrote...

Morroian wrote...

So fill
in the blanks each time differently. I hardly think we're going to get a
detailed history from before the game starts. If your imagination is so
great you should be able to do that.

History, race, family-all of this is forced upon us.

Uh, no. Race, yes...you can only be human. But history? We know of a grand total of TWO events from Hawke's life: his flight from Lothering and his becoming Champion of Kirkwall. That's not exactly an exhaustive account of a person's life. We know WAY more about the life of your Grey Warden, regardless of race.

And family is only "forced" upon you as much as it was in DAO. You couldn't be a human noble and NOT be a Cousland. You couldn't be a City Elf and NOT have Cyrion as a father or Shianni as a cousin. Nor a Dwarf noble and not be an Aeducan. In DA2, you have a sister. That's it.

But I don't know why I'm even bothering...you're never going to let go of this crap. You are dead set on hating this game, so of course everything that comes out will be molded and twisted to make sure you hate it too. And if something hasn't come out yet...well you'll just use that imagination you're so proud of.

Modifié par SirOccam, 25 juillet 2010 - 06:16 .

[mione]

Perhaps when announcing future titles Bioware should inform the public, about whether or not the selective hero in the first game will be the continuing character through out that series.

Maybe then it would stop all this complaining and spam topics. This is going to sound Ironic considering some people's opinion as of late but I'm sorry that Dragon Age is't like Mass Effect were you have one set character to play through out the series, but to be fair Bioware never stated that we would be playing just one person in DA (Heck you had six to choose from in the first game) so I really don't get all the hate as of late.

They left the Warden's ending opening this isn't the end people I have faith that we will see that person again in future games maybe even in 2 for all we know.

Modifié par mione, 25 juillet 2010 - 06:44 .

[darkiddd]

The people of this forum are really annoying, how can you complain about a game you haven't played or seen yet?, stop complaining and let bioware work.

[SirOccam]

[quote]Kordaris wrote...

[quote]SirOccam wrote...

It's when one side convinces the other to give up their case and switch sides, usually accomplished with superior logic and reasoning...okay so no, I don't suppose you would be familiar with that.[/quote]
Indeed, not much logic and reasoning in attempts by some to present a dull and boring if not outright silly name as Hawke as huge improvement over multiple choices in Dragon Age 1
[quote]
You've already decided you hate it, despite knowing almost nothing about it. [/quote]
We already know that we won't be able to change race, backstory and family of the character. A huge step back from Dragon Age 1.[/quote]
See, this is exactly my point. You're just going to keep mindlessly repeating these things no matter how many times they've been shown to be either wrong or irrelevant. You know nothing about his backstory, nor whether it's changeable or not. You just don't. As for family, like I already said, you couldn't change your family in Origins either.

[quote][quote]
Such as Hawke looking cheesy. How many times does it have to be said that you can change his appearance? [/quote]
On the game's webpage. The fact that Bioware decided to give the character a cheesy name and looks suggests they are not reaching for sophistication in their game IMHO. It seems they are focused more on making it combat orientated.The recent DLC news confirms that they are abandoning plot and RPG elements in favour of combat.[/quote]
This is just absurd. Again you're taking one small thing and blowing it out of proportion. Not only is your opinion that his name and look are "cheesy" exactly that...an opinion...his name and look have nothing to do with gameplay or story. Nothing.

And you know as little about the DLC as you do about DA2, which was already precious little enough. And your source is that ridiculous 1up article, which is demonstrably inaccurate. And even if it is spot-on about the DLC, that also has NOTHING to do with DA2 gameplay or story. Why you seem to think everything BioWare do has to epitomize some kind of corporate "movement" is beyond me.

 [quote][quote]The master of literary devices has weighed in, everyone! Someone should tell Homer, Chaucer, Brontë, Shelley, and the makers of films like Amadeus and The Princess Bride that their work is terrible [/quote]
I want to play a video game here. If I want to watch a movie or read a book I will do so in other entertainment venue.[/quote]
Wow, you missed that point by a mile. Literary devices are literary devices, regardless of in what medium they are presented. Even if you were right, and movies and books were irrelevant, you still haven't shown why flashbacks are so terrible for video games.

[quote][quote]
 But history? We know of a grand total of TWO events from Hawke's life: his flight from Lothering and his becoming Champion of Kirkwall. [/quote]
And that he has a sister he cares about.Perhaps some players are attracted to the peasant Hawke . I and others are not. Too bad that unlike Dragon Age 1 we will have no choice.[/quote]
Wrong. You know NOTHING about his sister except that her name is Bethany and she is a mage. Where did this "sister he cares about" come from? Seriously, I'd like to see a link. I'm sure it will be possible to decide that your Hawke has a close relationship with her, but I see no reason to assume that there will be no other way to play it. Obviously you've chosen to believe such a thing because it reinforces your hatred.

This "peasant" nonsense too. Where did that come from? We know he becomes a "penniless refugee" in Kirkwall, but when did anyone official say anything about his life in Lothering?

And why do you think you have "no choice" regarding anything about Hawke's life? At this point, you just sound like a troll.

[quote][quote]And family is only "forced" upon you as much as it was in DAO. You couldn't be a human noble and NOT be a Cousland. You couldn't be a City Elf and NOT have Cyrion as a father or Shianni as a cousin. Nor a Dwarf noble and not be an Aeducan. [/quote]
Your very post admits that there was wider selection in choices for players in Dragon Age 1 and that its names were more sophisticated.[/quote]
I admitted that their names were more sophisticated? Wow, man, what the hell are you smoking?

And unless your character's family was the only thing you cared about in your Origins, then no, it's not the same thing. If you wanted to play a Human Noble, you were STUCK with being a Cousland. It was not a choice you could make. If you didn't want to be a Cousland, you couldn't be the race you wanted either.

Modifié par SirOccam, 25 juillet 2010 - 07:12 .

[Faust1979]

 the game is set in the same world, follows the same lore, it seems like a real sequel to me

[angj57]

It's a shame that you can't log on to a bioware forum and find people who are willing to keep an open mind about bioware games. My response to the title-- It's not too late, you can stop acting like children. Role playing games are made great by characters and story. We know nothing about the characters but their names, and we no absolutely nothing about the story. Of course, when the game comes out, no matter how great it is, an extremely vocal small minority will trash it, as they do other with other games. But threads like this show us how shallow those complaints really are-- they start before we even know anything about the game!

[Narreneth]

pmaura wrote...


DURR HURR derp derp derr derr DURR hURR DERR Derp derp DERP durr hurr derr HEY EVERYONE LOOK AT ME hurr durr derp derp

[Valente11]

These forums are no longer the place to go to find mature users. How old is the OP, 5? It's not too late? err yes, it is. Also that Kordaris fool is getting on my nerves, please let this crap go, any supposed steps back from DA1 are in your mind, seeing as games, like all art, are subjective. This is coming from a veteran of Bioware's since the Interplay days: who cares, let it go, the game is not going to change, there will never be another Baldur's Gate or Planescape: Torment, and Dragon Age, the game so many here are praising, was filled with just as much negativity and stubborn child-posters before it's release.



Oh, and Mass Effect is a great game, all rpg's should learn from it.

[Hollingdale]

It's extra awesome considering how much the story in Dragon Age 1 sucked.

[triggerhappy456]

will people stop complaining about how this game is changing!

half the people seem to be demanding that the game not do what mass effect did, become more action-y, but at the same time want the warden to carry on into the next game, a feature which is in very few games other than mass effect

[Drasanil]

triggerhappy456 wrote...
half the people seem to be demanding that the game not do what mass effect did, become more action-y, but at the same time want the warden to carry on into the next game, a feature which is in very few games other than mass effect

I don't think it’s so much having the Warden carry over or not, that is really frying people's bacon, but rather loosing the ability choose from different backgrounds and being stuck with a character that on the surface, at least, doesn’t appeal to their tastes.
 
I know that is my main grumble with the game. I find human protagonists in Fantasy games intolerably boring and uninspiring and doubly so for peasants, I hope Hawke’s story is compelling enough to make up for it, but so far that’s one big strike against DA2 in my book and not enough information about to rest to balance it out.

Although having Flemeth in the party seems pretty cool, I likeed her better than Morrigan any ways. I hope they kept Janeway as the VO and that didn't/don't tone down her cryptic craziness.

Modifié par Drasanil, 25 juillet 2010 - 09:47 .

[In Exile]

Drasanil wrote...
I don't think it’s so much having the Warden carry over or not, that is really frying people's bacon, but rather loosing the ability choose from different backgrounds and being stuck with a character that on the surface, at least, doesn’t appeal to their tastes.

But this can happen very often. Who says I want to be an orphan child raised by some insane old mage in Candlekeep? Oh noes! No freedom - my background is fixed and I can never change it, roleplay is impossible.

See, I hate this. I hate this argument because it demands you accept a particular conception of what it means to RP to be coherent. If I think RP in a cRPG means a reactive world, and the mental experience of a variable background that I invent is not important, obviously I am wrong and stupid and a casual fan.

Hawke is most certainly a restricted character. But so was the Warden in DA:O, independent of origin. We could have a long debate on the issue, but of particular relevance was that the game demanded that you be a Grey Warden first, and whatever your origin second. After Ostagar, you weren't  a Cousland conscripted into the Wardens - you were a Warden who was once a Cousland. And it is very possible to get excited about DA:O, about the Origins, and be absolutely floored when you find out how narrow you're allowed to play your character.

Modifié par In Exile, 25 juillet 2010 - 10:20 .

[Drasanil]

In Exile wrote...

Hawke is most certainly a restricted character. But so was the Warden in DA:O, independent of origin. We could have a long debate on the issue, but of particular relevance was that the game demanded that you be a Grey Warden first, and whatever your origin second. After Ostagar, you weren't  a Cousland conscripted into the Wardens - you were a Warden who was once a Cousland. And it is very possible to get excited about DA:O, about the Origins, and be absolutely floored when you find out how narrow you're allowed to play your character.

True, your choices were fairly narrow. However, the different Origins informed who your character was and would ideally shape which choices different Wardens would make. A dalish warden would almost certainly side with Zathrian, were as a Cousland, might side with the Werewolves, a mage would be more likely to side with the circle and so forth...

On the other Hawke is Hawke, he/she will have had the same formative experiences no matter how many times you restart the game he is the same person and therefore should make the same decisions no matter how many times a given scenario plays out. Doing otherwise just feels weird.

[Bugzehat]

In Exile wrote...
it is very possible to get excited about DA:O, about the Origins, and be absolutely floored when you find out how narrow you're allowed to play your character.

Yes, this. I was very disappointed when I realised my chosen origin was not going to have a significant impact on the story (and I do mean significant -- I realise that the origins had some impact). Don't get me wrong, I liked the origins, but they weren't the perfect examples of uninhibited roleplaying that some people claim they were.

Modifié par Bugzehat, 25 juillet 2010 - 10:33 .

[SirOccam]

Drasanil wrote...

In Exile wrote...

Hawke is most certainly a restricted character. But so was the Warden in DA:O, independent of origin. We could have a long debate on the issue, but of particular relevance was that the game demanded that you be a Grey Warden first, and whatever your origin second. After Ostagar, you weren't  a Cousland conscripted into the Wardens - you were a Warden who was once a Cousland. And it is very possible to get excited about DA:O, about the Origins, and be absolutely floored when you find out how narrow you're allowed to play your character.

True, your choices were fairly narrow. However, the different Origins informed who your character was and would ideally shape which choices different Wardens would make. A dalish warden would almost certainly side with Zathrian, were as a Cousland, might side with the Werewolves, a mage would be more likely to side with the circle and so forth...

But all those likelihoods are in your head...the gameplay is not affected at all. You still have the exact same choices. You could just as easily play a Dalish who sides with the Werewolves and slaughters the clan or a Mage who opts for the Rite of Annulment.

On the other Hawke is Hawke, he/she will have had the same formative experiences no matter how many times you restart the game he is the same person and therefore should make the same decisions no matter how many times a given scenario plays out. Doing otherwise just feels weird.

The same things might happen, but the way he perceives them will be all up to you. The destruction of Lothering might be just the reason he's looking for to get out of town. Or maybe it will leave him devastated at the destruction of all he holds dear. Maybe he'll be frightened at the thought of leaving, or maybe he'll relish the opportunity to make something of himself. There's plenty of room for all kinds of differentiation, and I'm sure the dialogue wheel will support many options.

[AlanC9]

On the other Hawke is Hawke, he/she will have had the same formative experiences no matter how many times you restart the game he is the same person and therefore should make the same decisions no matter how many times a given scenario plays out. Doing otherwise just feels weird.

And in Baldur's Gate, every PC had the exact same formative experiences.

[In Exile]

Drasanil wrote...
True, your choices were fairly narrow. However, the different Origins informed who your character was and would ideally shape which choices different Wardens would make.

I don't roleplay that way. To me, it is not about experience and background that makes the character, but rather personality. To me, it is personality that drives the individual. So when I create a particular character, the background details are largely irrelevant. It does not matter the young Cousland had a mother and a father, and a brother, and a nursemaid, etc. What matters is whether he is competitive or shy, arrogant or reserved, etc.

A dalish warden would almost certainly side with Zathrian, were as a Cousland, might side with the Werewolves, a mage would be more likely to side with the circle and so forth...

A mage could as easily hate the Circle for years of imprisonment, for being forced to abandon his home for the sake of Irving's machinations, for the fact the mages were so weak and incompetent to become abominations in the first place (which is Morrigan's perspective).

A dalish Warden could as easily see Zathrian as an abomination who has perverted his people's traditions by extending his life unaturally and leading his people to believe he has captured some heritage of Arlathan when in fact he is a charlatan.

So with this I disagree. I don't think your background is so determinant of who you are.

On the other Hawke is Hawke, he/she will have had the same formative experiences no matter how many times you restart the game he is the same person and therefore should make the same decisions no matter how many times a given scenario plays out. Doing otherwise just feels weird.

I disagree adamantly. This only matters if you think a formative expereince determines personality instead of personality determining the outcome of the so-called formative experience.

This is not to say I am on the nature side of the nature/nurture debate, but speaking from the point of view of developmental and personality psychology, to some degree at least personality is inborn and absolutely independent of background.

[In Exile]

Kordaris wrote...

In Exile wrote...
Hawke is most certainly a restricted character. But so was the Warden in DA:O, independent of origin

Warden was a function not a character. Each character was unique in his fulfiling of the role.

So was the Warden was unique in fulfilling his role? Since, logically, if the Warden is not a character, and if all characters are unique in fulfilling their role, then we can conclude absolutely nothing.

Not to mention:

Hawke was a function not a character. Each character was unique in his fulfiling of the role.

Yeah, way to rock that logical equivalency.

[SirOccam]

Kordaris wrote...

In Exile wrote...
Hawke is most certainly a restricted character. But so was the Warden in DA:O, independent of origin

Warden was a function not a character. Each character was unique in his fulfiling of the role.

By that logic, Hawke and Shepard are "functions," too. The whole POINT is to give variety in how you go about doing things. The difference is that the Warden and Shepard had variety in doing their ONE, PRE-DETERMINED TASK. Hawke has no one great evil to overcome.

[Riona45]

AndarianTD wrote...

So one of the things being complained about is that DA2 may not feature the story of the Warden from DA:O? Good. Personally, I'd prefer a fresh story for DA2. Are people really up in arms because they don't want to play something new? Really?

I know, I pretty much always see creating a new character, for a new story, as a good thing.

[Riona45]

Kordaris wrote...

I will never identify with the peasant Hawke, He is just repulsive.

Why, because he may be a peasant?  Because he begins as a penniless refugee?

What's with all this class bias coming from you?  Or at least, that's what it seems like (you feel the need to point out that Hawke is a peasant).  It's even in your signature!

Modifié par Riona45, 25 juillet 2010 - 11:52 .