12857 réponses à ce sujet

[KnightofPhoenix]

[quote]Addai67 wrote...

[quote]KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Eamon and his allies have enough men to make it draw and force negotiations. [/quote]
Right. So...  what are we arguing about?[/quote][/quote]

That the majority of nobles and it's a very safe bet to say the majority of troops, support Loghain.
The fact that his opponents can fight him to a standstill in the Landsmeet, not forgetting the fact that the Warden is a killing machine, does not change that fact.

[quote]phaonica wrote...
You don't seem interested in elaborating on that, so I won't ask. [/quote]

I already did here in the past, and you were the one who asked me. Plus, I am playing Alpha Protocol, so I can't be bothered.

Suffice to say that I respect and sympathize with Uldred more than Anders, and I think it's obvious as to why.

[quote]
As
much as it has been said that countless people in both DAO and DA2 are
useless and morons, I had started to wonder, if Loghain fit into that
group, why he is likeable despite being so.
[/quote]

I don't think Loghain is useless and a moron, certainly not in the same way as DA2 characters. I still say that if Loghain had not retreated from Ostagar, Ferelden would have very likely been doomed.

And unlike that group, Loghain has an interesting character that explains his political ineptitude. He is a soldier and an idealist, that's shown in his character. Which is why his flaws make him interesting and not irritating like DA2 ones, for me.

[phaonica]

Addai67 wrote...

phaonica wrote...
If he is reasonable and rational, though, how is it that he is also blind, inept, and an idiot?

He's not an idiot- did I say that??  However his strengths lie in tactics, not strategy (even though Gaider calls him a strategist, that term implies political finesse so I don't think it quite fits).

No, I don't think you said he was an idiot. I was just compiling a list of sentiments I had perceived from various posts on the page.

He is also not blind, except in key points which prove tragic and disastrous.  Not sure you could argue otherwise. 

I could try but I don't think I have the endurance for it.

I'm not dissing him, I just think his weaknesses make him an even more interesting figure.  If he didn't have them, I doubt we'd still be talking about him. 

Perhaps. Oddly, for me, I sometimes think that while  flaws make a protagonist more interesting, flaws make an antagonist less interesting. I find that an antagonist who has strong and selfless convictions and whose actions are understandable, yet somehow conflict with the protagonist are more compelling than an antagonist who is easy to condemn. I would agree that if the antagonist had no flaws, then there would be no conflict, and the character would no longer be an antagonist. I have a high level of appreciation for an antagonist character that can make me question my own convictions.

If I were to attempt to pinpoint why I like Loghain so much, a lot of it has to do with his strength of resolve in the face of confrontation, sacrifice, and loss, for a cause that I perceive to be a selfless one. Perhaps that perception has severe flaws, but it's the perception that I find the most fun, even if it isn't the most true.

I would say the same, though I think the thing that I find most attractive about him is his deep personal loyalty to those he loves.  I think I see him differently than a lot of people do, who focus on him as a nationalist and a man of duty.  He is that, but as I see it, his sense of duty and country were always personified, first in Maric and then in Anora (and in Ellie, in my story).

I can understand this perception, that Loghain's loyalty to Ferelden is an expression of his loyalty to Maric/Anora/Ellie. However, at least one quote by Maric, near the end of the Calling, gives me the impression that Loghain's expression of loyalty goes so far that he would even sacrifice the one he is loyal to as an expression of that loyalty (if that makes any sense). Or maybe even Maric misunderstands Loghain somewhat. Or maybe I misunderstand them both.

Either way, the idea of Loghain falling apart when his loved ones are threatened seems to conflict with my perception that he is stronger than that.

[phaonica]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I already did here in the past, and you were the one who asked me. Plus, I am playing Alpha Protocol, so I can't be bothered.

Oh, well, now I feel dumb. My apologies. You go have fun! (I haven't gotten very far into AP, yet, but I'm having fun with it, too.)

And unlike that group, Loghain has an interesting character that explains his political ineptitude. He is a soldier and an idealist, that's shown in his character. Which is why his flaws make him interesting and not irritating like DA2 ones, for me.

I suppose his attempt to take on a role that wasn't meant for him does contribute to some sympathy, as opposed to characters who are somehow incompetant in their element.

[KnightofPhoenix]

No apologies needed

And I am having a lot of fun! Much more than when I first played it on 360.
I think Mike Thorton is becoming my favorite protagonist ever.

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

I just bought Alpha protocol on Steam. Been looking at vids and the game info on game banshee, and its alot more developed than I had thought. The amount of choice and stuff....

[KnightofPhoenix]

There are quite a few interesting choices in there. And some interesting consequences. Nothing game changing, but pretty interesting nonetheless. Some of them are accumulative and not based on one choice, which I like.

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

Don't need to be game changing. Just to have them, and know that a definite effect, intended or not, will take place, is enough for me. Accumilitive choices are even more interesting, if what I'm reading on game Banshee is correct.

regardless, whatever my experience, it was a whopping 2 euros, and I get to experiment with steam as well.

[KnightofPhoenix]

I've love to hear your thoughts about it. I just finished meeting with Albatross of G22. Awesome guy. And I like Sis, she'd be a crucial piece in the game my Mike Thorton will be playing after the end.

[Joy Divison]

phaonica wrote...

Perhaps. Oddly, for me, I sometimes think that while  flaws make a protagonist more interesting, flaws make an antagonist less interesting. I find that an antagonist who has strong and selfless convictions and whose actions are understandable, yet somehow conflict with the protagonist are more compelling than an antagonist who is easy to condemn. I would agree that if the antagonist had no flaws, then there would be no conflict, and the character would no longer be an antagonist. I have a high level of appreciation for an antagonist character that can make me question my own convictions.

I think you are confusing people mean when they say, "I like Loghain bc/ he is flawed".  What you describe above is EXACTLY why these people like Loghain.  He is flawed not i the way that the CHARACTER has things about him we don't like, but as a PERSON has specific traits that make them not necessarily do the best thing for understandable reasons.

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

I'll definitely let you know what I think. It will probably finish downloading tomorrow, by the looks of it. Roughly how long is the game, on average?

[Addai]

[quote]KnightofPhoenix wrote...

[quote]Addai67 wrote...

[quote]KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Eamon and his allies have enough men to make it draw and force negotiations. [/quote]
Right. So...  what are we arguing about?[/quote][/quote]

That the majority of nobles and it's a very safe bet to say the majority of troops, support Loghain.
The fact that his opponents can fight him to a standstill in the Landsmeet, not forgetting the fact that the Warden is a killing machine, does not change that fact.
[/quote][/quote]
I do forget that the Warden is a killing machine- rather, I choose to ignore that, and try to see what happens as realistic.

And I think the picture is of a deeply divided chamber.  Not one that is majorly in Loghain's favor but for plot serendipity.  YMMV and obviously does.

Modifié par Addai67, 26 septembre 2011 - 11:24 .

[Costin_Razvan]

Mike Thorton: You're offering me a job?
Leeland: Mike, you already work for me. I just like to make it official.

Mike: Your mistake is not going to look good on a field report, or the nightly news, but it doesn't have to be your mistake.
Parker: I take it you have a plan?
Mike: Yea, you've been drafted so it's time you started making yourself useful.

Mina: Mike please don't, I can explain....
Mike: I don't care, I've had to listen to you all this and now I want you to be quiet. ( kill the woman he loved ).

Westridge: You gunning for a job? Halbech's new chief of security?
Mike: My goals are little higher then that. Any last words?
Westridge: Yeah, go to hell...


.....

Mike: Sooner or later you will answer to me.

Mike: Here's thing Leeland, I don't really need you anymore.
Leeland: Oh? How do you figure that.
Mike: I traveled all over the world to stop you, you think I didn't make a network of my own? ( lists all his friends and allies )...so I don't really need you. I can make my own Halbech and then I can make the world any way I want.

That last line is the most epic thing ever said in video game.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

I'll definitely let you know what I think. It will probably finish downloading tomorrow, by the looks of it. Roughly how long is the game, on average?

Not that long. I am 3/4 in, give or take, with 23 hours of gameplay. So it won't be that much over 30.

Addai67 wrote...

And
I think the picture is of a deeply divided chamber.  Not one that is
majorly in Loghain's favor but for plot serendipity.  YMMV and obviously
does.

Yes (to an extent, I still maintain that most were with Loghain by default, but perhaps not an overwhelming majority), but I think they can be swayed one way or the other. At least when it comes to the important banns who matter (the ones we interact with), not the overglorified banns that own a few acres of land and suddenly think they are noble for it.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Costin_Razvan wrote...
That last line is the most epic thing ever said in video game.

Thorton has a lot of epic lines. Some of them funny, some of them badass, some of them the two at the same time.

And that scene with Mina sends chivers down my spine.  My Mike never really loved her though. He did like her however but suspected what she was up to ever since uncovering her dossier in the CIA listening post in Rome.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 26 septembre 2011 - 11:34 .

[Addai]

phaonica wrote...
Perhaps. Oddly, for me, I sometimes think that while  flaws make a protagonist more interesting, flaws make an antagonist less interesting. I find that an antagonist who has strong and selfless convictions and whose actions are understandable, yet somehow conflict with the protagonist are more compelling than an antagonist who is easy to condemn. I would agree that if the antagonist had no flaws, then there would be no conflict, and the character would no longer be an antagonist. I have a high level of appreciation for an antagonist character that can make me question my own convictions.

Having converted to Loghainism, I would have to say he qualifies as that for me.  lol

I can understand this perception, that Loghain's loyalty to Ferelden is an expression of his loyalty to Maric/Anora/Ellie. However, at least one quote by Maric, near the end of the Calling, gives me the impression that Loghain's expression of loyalty goes so far that he would even sacrifice the one he is loyal to as an expression of that loyalty (if that makes any sense). Or maybe even Maric misunderstands Loghain somewhat. Or maybe I misunderstand them both.

Do you mean at the end of TST, regarding West Hill?  Maric had to extract that promise from him.  It didn't originate with Loghain.

Either way, the idea of Loghain falling apart when his loved ones are threatened seems to conflict with my perception that he is stronger than that.

I prefer to think everyone has their limits.  But, I also don't see it as "falling apart."  In psychology they will say that it's not a traumatic event that affects a person so much as what they tell themselves about it.  Loghain told himself "I will never fail a loved one again," but that is beyond any person.  In trying to keep his promise, he overreaches.  All this is not to say he did not have rational, good reasons to do what he does.  I think on every point- Ostagar, supporting Howe, etc.- he can be defended as a matter of the rational course for the information he had at the time and the political situation.  His "demons" as it were, were more tipping points than guiding factors, as I see it.  Everyone has those.  He's human, not a machine.

And now I have to commute home.

[phaonica]

Addai67 wrote...

I can understand this perception, that Loghain's loyalty to Ferelden is an expression of his loyalty to Maric/Anora/Ellie. However, at least one quote by Maric, near the end of the Calling, gives me the impression that Loghain's expression of loyalty goes so far that he would even sacrifice the one he is loyal to as an expression of that loyalty (if that makes any sense). Or maybe even Maric misunderstands Loghain somewhat. Or maybe I misunderstand them both.

Do you mean at the end of TST, regarding West Hill?  Maric had to extract that promise from him.  It didn't originate with Loghain.

I meant the part that goes like this: 
"If it is Loghain," Maric said, his smile widening, "then you're in trouble."
"With his precious king our hostage? I think not," Bregan sneered.
"Then you don't know Loghain."

I prefer to think everyone has their limits.  But, I also don't see it as "falling apart."

I don't know. In your fic, once Ellie was gone, it seemed more like he gave up on Ferelden and focused entirely on having lost her. Perhaps that is a misinterpretation. I don't prefer to think that Loghain doesn't care about anyone except his immediate loved ones and their causes only by extension, but perhaps I'm wrong about that, too.

Modifié par phaonica, 27 septembre 2011 - 01:45 .

[Costin_Razvan]

Is this how you would see yourself liking Loghain? As the broken husk of a man who fails all along the way and at the end sees the errors his way after he losses everything?

Yes then definetly you do not see Loghain as others here do. I admire Loghain for his patriotism and pragmatism, for his military skills and moral principles. Others might have gone all the way in terms of political assassinations and dealing with the nobles but he didn't. He wanted above all to preserve Fereldan as it was even it meant that he had to deal with a bunch of idiots who rose up to try and gain something politically, or are you going to tell me it was only Loghain's hand that caused the civil war?

That Anora is in your mind on a very weak standing as the Landsmeet stands, shouldn't it mean her position should be strengthened instead of weakened furthered by giving in to the demands of the Bannorn? You say you know history, and you're arguments so far do show that you do. But have you learned anything from it in terms of politics? Cause I fail to see how you would lay the foundation of a stable state.

By having Anora and Loghain give in to the nobles you are just flashing a white flag. Do you truly believe that nobles like those in Bannorn do not pounce at the sign of weakness?

[KnightofPhoenix]

It feels like the old days. The same old debate about centralized vs feudal states.
I don't see anyone budging lol. Though I admit that its incomprensible to me. The weaknesses and irrationality of the latter are self-evident and obvious not only in our own history but also in DA.
But that imo, is due to the idealist logic of talking about what ought to be before what is.

[Addai]

phaonica wrote...

I meant the part that goes like this: 
"If it is Loghain," Maric said, his smile widening, "then you're in trouble."
"With his precious king our hostage? I think not," Bregan sneered.
"Then you don't know Loghain."

Ah, right.  Well Maric would have to say that, though there is truth to it.

I don't know. In your fic, once Ellie was gone, it seemed more like he gave up on Ferelden and focused entirely on having lost her. Perhaps that is a misinterpretation. I don't prefer to think that Loghain doesn't care about anyone except his immediate loved ones and their causes only by extension, but perhaps I'm wrong about that, too.

He was functioning- to outside appearances he would have been mostly the same.  The only difference being that he was holed up in Denerim, but this was also because of the increasing problem of Howe and Anora's fear of him.

Because I gave him an inner monologue, you know the appearance is not his internal reality, and I think even in the game you see him depressed, fumbling, and increasingly frustrated.  It was not really losing his family that put him over the edge, it was the suspicion that he had allowed the circumstance that led to that happening.  I saw it as having a paralyzing effect on him. He would normally have been a man of action and of strategies, but whatever he did seemed to make things worse, and once his attempts to recover Ellie failed and he was losing the Bannorn as well, he could not see a way out that might not endanger Anora and make things worse. He believed in any case that he was acting in Ferelden's interests.  He had to put down a rebellion.  He hangs the hunters of Oswin in the game- I just gave him a different reason for doing so.

I see a similar evolution to this in the game, too.  When someone forces the reins out of his hands, he is relieved so long as Anora is well.  Also there is a dichotomy in his post-LM dialogue that's instructive.  At times he is defensive and claims he has good reasons for everything he did, but at other points says it's all his fault and seems to view it all very black.  I don't see him as a "rock' type of character, not in his internal world.  In my story he also had greater personal happiness and vulnerability, so there had to be greater consequence for losing it.

Anyway, as they say in Dune, a leader is but a man.  I don't even see Loghain as an antagonist- he's a protagonist, in the game depending on your RP perspective, and certainly in my story.

Modifié par Addai67, 27 septembre 2011 - 03:23 .

[Addai]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

By having Anora and Loghain give in to the nobles you are just flashing a white flag. Do you truly believe that nobles like those in Bannorn do not pounce at the sign of weakness?

Right, because they responded so well to Loghain steamrolling them.

You don't think Loghain sees at the end of the game that he's failed?  Then you haven't read his dialogue.  At the very least he was letting Howe lead him around by the nose.  As Gaider said, he believed he had him under control and that was not the case.

[Addai]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

It feels like the old days. The same old debate about centralized vs feudal states.
I don't see anyone budging lol. Though I admit that its incomprensible to me. The weaknesses and irrationality of the latter are self-evident and obvious not only in our own history but also in DA.
But that imo, is due to the idealist logic of talking about what ought to be before what is.

Well I could explain my philosophy, but I'm explaining myself too much and it's quite tiring. lol  I don't consider myself an idealist.  My viewpoint is more cynical than that.  Just because I don't like politics doesn't mean I don't understand how it works.  I did want to make a career of it once.

[Costin_Razvan]

Right, because they responded so well to Loghain steamrolling them.

And your argument is that instead of seeking a more moderate solution then this bull**** of giving up everything is to roll down on them? It may be my preference but there's other ones as well.

Really? How exactly do you expect Anora to rule when she starts her reign with a major sign of weakness and one could say betrayal against her father? She is NOT as popular as some might say. I reloaded the game specifically to hear to what the nobles talk at the Tavern, some despise Howe, but no one was talking against Loghain while I heard talk against Alistair.

You don't think Loghain sees at the end of the game that he's failed? Then you haven't read his dialogue. At the very least he was letting Howe lead him around by the nose. As Gaider said, he believed he had him under control and that was not the case.

Continue telling me what I have or have not read or understood from the story of the games/books. I find it must delightful.

Loghain admits to strategic errors ( he calls them tactical but that's Gaider being retarded ). He specifically mentions that defending the border against the Chevaliers was a bad move, though frankly FOUR Legions is a massive invasion force in my eyes, and anyone thinking that a noble in his right mind from Fereldan would accept that kind of aid is an idiot.

In some ways I despise Anora, yes I think she is the best ruler between her and Prince retarded, but I don't think much of her other then that she will make some cultural progress and manage to rein the nobles in...well barely. Awakening and her comments on problems in the Bannorn anyone?

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 27 septembre 2011 - 05:42 .

[Addai]

Anora made concessions so as not to go under with her father. People do this in politics all the time. Once you're a liability, you go under the bus. Way, way under it, if you're a big liability.

But I'm not going to argue anymore. Your tone is getting belligerent and like I said, if you don't like it, it's your prerogative not to read it or to write it off.

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

Just woke up, checked steam. Still at 49% download for AP. F*cking lame internet connection.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Addai67 wrote...
Well I could explain my philosophy, but I'm explaining myself too much and it's quite tiring. lol 

I'd be interested in reading it one of these days

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

Just woke up, checked steam. Still at 49% download for AP. F*cking lame internet connection.

Eeesh. I guess you'll start tomorrow? 

I suggest starting as a recruit, it unlocks veteran after you finish the game.