309 réponses à ce sujet

[tmp7704]

The Hardest Thing In The World wrote...

There's no problem.There is only a problem because what you illustrated is absurd.  Stick to the Mage tower quest, you pick the first 2 options if you think going to the mage tower to get the mages help will take too much time. 

This can work in some situations, but in others there's not even potential drawback of this sort -- choosing to cure both sides in the elves/werewolves arc for example.

[The Hardest Thing In The World]

But to me, the werewolves quest is the perfect example of a well implemented 3rd option choice. Not so much is the mage tower quest. Which is why I used that for both of out benefit.

[The Hardest Thing In The World]

You see, I think the problem here is some of you think that every option should lead to some penalty, hence your highlighting of the Brecilian forest quest.

[upsettingshorts]

The Hardest Thing In The World wrote...

You see, I think the problem here is some of you think that every option should lead to some penalty, hence your highlighting of the Brecilian forest quest.

I get more upset about it when discussing Mass Effect and the fact the Paragon tendency to grant second chances and be noble has not once come back to haunt Shepard.  Nor has the Renegade Shepard's cold pragmatism won Shepard any significant advantages.

That kind of thing upsets me. 

Dragon Age... doesn't really have the same setup.  I'd like the "third way" option to be inherently more difficult than the two obvious options though.  The best decisions - IMHO - in DA:O were in A Paragon of Her Kind with both Harrowmont vs. Bhelan and the fate of the Anvil of the Void precisely because neither path presented you with an easy to swallow alternative.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 07 octobre 2010 - 07:33 .

[Archmage Silvery]

I'd keep them - I guess I'm kind of stuck thinking in alignments; Good, Evil & Neutral. It's good to have the option, but if you're truly roleplaying, then it shouldn't be a problem to ignore the third moral choice.

[tmp7704]

The Hardest Thing In The World wrote...

You see, I think the problem here is some of you think that every option should lead to some penalty, hence your highlighting of the Brecilian forest quest.

I think it's more about need for balance between the options, or they effectively cease to be actual options.
 
It doesn't mean any option ever has to come with a penalty, providing multiple "happy ends" is okay too. But if you mix together "A dies" "B dies" and "everyone lives happily ever after" especially if that one happy end doesn't actually involve much effort at all to achieve, then the situation can be perceived as skewed by some.

[The Hardest Thing In The World]

I think we all agree that Connor quest is skewed. I myself chose to sacrifice Isolde.



But removing 3rd options(eg. Zathrian curing the werewolves) completely? I'm against it.

[Lotto]

except killing isolde was the easiest decision in the game

[Reaverwind]

The Hardest Thing In The World wrote...

I think we all agree that Connor quest is skewed. I myself chose to sacrifice Isolde.

But removing 3rd options(eg. Zathrian curing the werewolves) completely? I'm against it.

I don't think anyone is against having a 3rd option to resolve a quest. What I object to is the easy cop-out choice like that presented by the Redcliffe questline. The game makes it clear that leaving the area prior to entering the castle results in dire consequences. Why should those consequences be abruptly removed before dealing with the source of the problem? Nature of the Beast was better handled - even the pacifist route didn't allow you to save everybody.

[upsettingshorts]

Yep, Zathrian died. Then Ashley Williams took over the elves, and you know how she feels about nonhumans...

[The Hardest Thing In The World]

Yeah, reading some of the posts again, I think I misunderstood some of you and thought you think every choice should lead to dire/bad consequnces or you want 3rd options to removed completely.

[upsettingshorts]

I'll summarize my view of the ideal integration of a third option:

1) Choice A: Good for some, bad for others.
2) Choice B: Bad for some, good for others.
3) Choice C: (Available only if certain logical preconditions are met - like having already cleared the Circle of Magi and sided with the Mages before going to Redcliff) Good for most/all.

Maybe if you went to the Mage Tower first but sided with the Templars, they arrive to help deal with the abomination problem - you know, that is what they do  - themselves.   Granted, they'd probly just cut Connor's head off, but I doubt Alistair would get as upset given he was almost a Templar and is familiar with their ways, and his execution would be more "official" having been done by people who are essentially acting on Chantry authority.  Given Isolde's piety, while she'd still be extremely upset given it was her child, I highly doubt that rage would be directed at your PC.

Stuff like that.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 07 octobre 2010 - 08:55 .

[SafetyShattered]

I would say remove it. Simply for the reason that I want to be forced to make tough decisions.

i simply don't want an easy alternative option.

[Perfect-Kenshin]

Remove them. They cheapen the choice considerably. It's like you said: Why is choosing to kill Connor or his mother even an issue when I can just save them both?

[sheridanmovieguy]

Bioware is pretty good about balancing these, I think. The do have the third option sometimes, yes, which I think is good (and usually you have to work for it). There are also plenty of times when you don't have one, such as choosing who to leave behind on Virmire, or which king to appoint for Orzamar (as both have pretty glaring flaws).



I like that sometimes you can find a middle ground.

[Ortaya Alevli]

Having Zathrian end the cure is not a "third option". It's simply one of the three options. It happens to create a sense of "doing the right thing" without feeling like a cheap way out.

Getting help from the Tower, on the other hand, is a perfect "third option". It shamelessly trivializes the other two options and the possible drama associated to them. That's the difference. And no, I don't think that the trip would take a long time is a sufficient reason not to consider it. It never gave me pause, not even in my first, none-the-wiser playthrough.

Mass Effect is pretty much a fairy tale compared to Dragon Age. Whatever drama it needed was sufficiently covered by the Virmire chapter. Most of the moral choices there simply serve the purpose of making another notch into your karma meter. Drahon Age, however, is a consequence-driven game. Cop-outs cheapen your decisions more than they would in Mass Effect.

Or so I think.

[tmp7704]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Yep, Zathrian died. Then Ashley Williams took over the elves, and you know how she feels about nonhumans...

err, Zathrian's assistant takes over when he dies and she promotes co-operation with humans and otherwise peaceful existence. In contrast, if Zathrian lives he's said to be source of conflict because of his prejudices, until he decides to disappear years later. So the third option not only saves everyone, but it also ensures elves don't ****** off people in the long run, by removing Zathrian from the picture.

[Reaverwind]

tmp7704 wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Yep, Zathrian died. Then Ashley Williams took over the elves, and you know how she feels about nonhumans...

err, Zathrian's assistant takes over when he dies and she promotes co-operation with humans and otherwise peaceful existence. In contrast, if Zathrian lives he's said to be source of conflict because of his prejudices, until he decides to disappear years later. So the third option not only saves everyone, but it also ensures elves don't ****** off people in the long run, by removing Zathrian from the picture.

Tensions rise between the Dalish and humans regardless. Lanaya simply proves to be a mediator. Whether that's a good or bad thing depends on perspective - mediators have often been called "appeasers".

[upsettingshorts]

tmp7704 wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Yep, Zathrian died. Then Ashley Williams took over the elves, and you know how she feels about nonhumans...

err, Zathrian's assistant takes over when he dies and she promotes co-operation with humans and otherwise peaceful existence. In contrast, if Zathrian lives he's said to be source of conflict because of his prejudices, until he decides to disappear years later. So the third option not only saves everyone, but it also ensures elves don't ****** off people in the long run, by removing Zathrian from the picture.

I was joking.  His assistant was voiced by Kimberly Brooks, aka Ashley Williams.

But yeah, Zathrian croaking is basically the only consequence of the "third way" choice in that quest if I remember correctly.

[tmp7704]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

I was joking.  His assistant was voiced by Kimberly Brooks, aka Ashley Williams.

Yeah, i was guessing there's a VA connection or something to that effect, but wasn't sure so it was just in case there's some confusion here

[Carmen_Willow]

I like having win-win solutions when they make sense. As someone said the Zathrian solution made sense -- everyone wins and it was logical (except Zathrian himself)





The Conor win-win solution did not make sense. It was an easy out.



I wouldn't want to see one in every situation, but I would like to see them enough to be looking for them.

[Aggie Punbot]

Shadowfang12 wrote...

I would say remove it. Simply for the reason that I want to be forced to make tough decisions.

Then make the tough decisions. It seems to me that you're complaining about the fact that you're personally too weak-willed to make a tough decision on your own.

Perfect-Kenshin wrote...

Remove them. They cheapen the
choice considerably. It's like you said: Why is choosing to kill Connor
or his mother even an issue when I can just save them both?

Seems to me that a few of you seem to resent the fact that you choose to meta-game. Try doing a bit of actual role playing instead of meta-gaming for once. You might find it makes your gaming experience a bit happier. I prefer the third option too but my jerk male Cousland simply says that the Tower is too far and decides who to kill based solely on the information he has. Role playing: not just for sissies.

Modifié par TS2Aggie, 07 octobre 2010 - 09:48 .

[Remmirath]

I think the third option needs to make sense. Ending the curse made sense, because all that needed to be done was to persuade Zathrian - and if you could do that, it worked.

Going to the Circle of Magi didn't make sense, because of the distances involved if nothing else - even if you had previously completed the quest, it would still take days if not weeks to get there and back. By then, you'd think that things would've gotten a lot worse in Redcliffe. I've never taken that option because I don't think it would work, and there's no reason for any of my characters to think it would, either.

I like having more options where it works. More options lead to an increased likelyhood of being able to do what your character would want to do in each situation. There are a lot of people who wouldn't take the 'best, easiest' option even if it is relatively obvious.