269 réponses à ce sujet

[Dave of Canada]

Saibh wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

As long as I got my lesbian romance, I'd be fine playing Sten! 

So, Sten would've been a transvestite?

Sten is aroused.

[lv12medic]

I thought the Origins part of Dragon Age: Origins had to do with having different origins to choose from at the beginning of the game? You know: Human Noble, Circle Mage, Dalish Elf, City Elf, Dwarf Commoner, Dwarf Noble.

And was also loosely tied with the whole back to Baldur's Gates roots marketing campaign or something. Or am I not reading 7/15ths between the lines? I'm confused.

[Morroian]

Faz432 wrote...

Fair enough but a lot of people, myself included were thinking bigger than that.

And Bioware is thinking even bigger ie the franchise is about Thedas not 1 character.

[casedawgz]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Uhm.. since when did DA2 cut off the story? DA:O had its closures and it set the stage for DA2 with Witch Hunt nicely.

Dragon Age isn't just about Ferelden. A lot of stuff is going on in Thedas, and BioWare wants us to experience the most important parts of it. Instead of reading about it in a codex entry.

I agree with most of what you said, other than Witch Hunt doing anything "nicely." That was quite possibly the worst piece of DLC I ever paid money for. And I bought horse armor!

[Meltemph]

If you call a story a Origin then that leads you to believe it the start of a larger story that will lead the an end containing the characters and themes started in that origin.

Either that or that it is the "Origins" of the current setting to which Thedas and the lore will be based out of. Perhaps the characters that did not have their stories rapped up are going to be part of the setting as a whole. Either way, an individual perception of something does not infer the meaning of another.

[Helena Tylena]

SirOccam wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

Helena Tylena wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

The more of these types of topics I see(and specifically, essentially the same people), the more I find myself agreeing with Albert Einstein.

Yes, E very much is MC2

Was more talking about this one...

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

I was thinking it was the one about the universe and human stupidity.

Me too, actually.

[SirOccam]

[quote]Faz432 wrote...

[quote]Saibh wrote...

[quote]Faz432 wrote...

As I said before, don't lead them on then by calling it an origin.

[/quote]

How does a game called "Dragon Age" indicate that it's the origins of the Warden, and not the series? It would have been leading you on had it been called "The Warden: Origins".

[/quote]

By the fact it's called Dragon Age: ORIGINS.

If you call a story a Origin then that leads you to believe it the start of a larger story that will lead the an end containing the characters and themes started in that origin.[/quote]

If you call a story a Origin then that leads you to believe it the start of a larger story that will lead the an end containing the characters and themes started in that origin.[/quote]

Bolded part = reasonable conclusion, and it so happens to be true

Italicized part = arbitrarily tacked on assumptions. But even so, the themes are very much alive and well, and I have no doubt they will continue. As will a significant number of characters, in fact.

What it really comes down to is you decided that every Dragon Age game was going to be about the Warden, and now you are trying to make it out to be something BioWare did wrong instead of admit that you made a bad assumption.

Modifié par SirOccam, 10 novembre 2010 - 02:58 .

[Faz432]

SirOccam wrote...

Faz432 wrote...

Saibh wrote...

Faz432 wrote...

As I said before, don't lead them on then by calling it an origin.

How does a game called "Dragon Age" indicate that it's the origins of the Warden, and not the series? It would have been leading you on had it been called "The Warden: Origins".

By the fact it's called Dragon Age: ORIGINS.

If you call a story a Origin then that leads you to believe it the start of a larger story that will lead the an end containing the characters and themes started in that origin.

Bolded part = reasonable conclusion, and it so happens to be true

Italicized part = arbitrarily tacked on assumptions. But even so, the themes are very much alive and well, and I have no doubt they will continue. As will a significant number of characters, in fact.

What it really comes down to is you decided that every Dragon Age game was going to be about the Warden, and now you are trying to make it out to be something BioWare did wrong instead of admit that you made a bad assumption.

No I didn't, I never ever said that, stop trying to twist my words.


I never ever said I wanted Dragon age to be all about The Warden.

I did say that I would like some continuation and what happened in Origins to have some relevance on the story of DA2 and into the future.

Modifié par Faz432, 10 novembre 2010 - 02:48 .

[Dave of Canada]

I just assumed "Origins" was a reference to the Origin stories.

[Morroian]

Faz432 wrote...

By the fact it's called Dragon Age: ORIGINS.

If you call a story a Origin then that leads you to believe it the start of a larger story that will lead the an end containing the characters and themes started in that origin.

It implies to me that its about the origin of events that will occcur throughout the Dragon Age. And Bioware have always said the series is about Thedas not 1 particular character.

[Saibh]

Faz432 wrote...

By the fact it's called Dragon Age: ORIGINS.

If you call a story a Origin then that leads you to believe it the start of a larger story that will lead the an end containing the characters and themes started in that origin.

I was never fooled. I was never led to believe anything. I firmly believed my Warden's story was over. Mass Effect is the sort of game that ends with the clear expectation of continuations--that's not how I felt with Origins.

In any case, the fact that it is called Dragon Age: Origins. The game is titled "Dragon Age". Not "The Grey Wardens". Not "The Blight". The game's title itself makes it very clear what the series will be about.

It's no one's fault but your own you chose to ignore it was named after an Age, and not a person or group or country.

In Exile wrote...

More to the point, Origins was something they added to the title about 7 months from release, and we all went WTF?

Excellent point. I didn't follow Origins' development, but I think I heard that somewhere.

[Kaiser Shepard]

Faz432 wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

Faz432 wrote...

Fair enough but a lot of people, myself included were thinking bigger than that.

Bigger how?
By constraining the entire series, one set on a huge continent with
many different cultures and politics, to be seen from the perspective of
merely one character? Not to mention that that character could either
be dead, happily maried, elevated to the position of king, queen or
teyrn... or even be on a long, strange trip through magical mirror land.

E: Ninja'd by the other Kaiser, marvelous. ../../../images/forum/emoticons/angry.png

Why are you lot trying to put words into my mouth and twist what I say?

Wait, what? Weren't you just saying how you expected the entire series to follow the Warden on his journeys?

[aznsoisauce]

Faz432 wrote...

Saibh wrote...

Faz432 wrote...

As I said before, don't lead them on then by calling it an origin.

How does a game called "Dragon Age" indicate that it's the origins of the Warden, and not the series? It would have been leading you on had it been called "The Warden: Origins".

By the fact it's called Dragon Age: ORIGINS.

If you call a story a Origin then that leads you to believe it the start of a larger story that will lead the an end containing the characters and themes started in that origin.

An origin is not at all indicative of where something ends.

You can keep saying "origins" is misleading -and it is, in a way - but it's so aptly descriptive of a game where you can choose from a number of origins for your Grey Warden.

[Onyx Jaguar]

Ironically the first Dragon Age game released did not follow the grey warden that you could create in Origins

[SirOccam]

Faz432 wrote...

SirOccam wrote...

Faz432 wrote...

Saibh wrote...

Faz432 wrote...

As I said before, don't lead them on then by calling it an origin.

How does a game called "Dragon Age" indicate that it's the origins of the Warden, and not the series? It would have been leading you on had it been called "The Warden: Origins".

By the fact it's called Dragon Age: ORIGINS.

If you call a story a Origin then that leads you to believe it the start of a larger story that will lead the an end containing the characters and themes started in that origin.

Bolded part = reasonable conclusion, and it so happens to be true

Italicized part = arbitrarily tacked on assumptions. But even so, the themes are very much alive and well, and I have no doubt they will continue. As will a significant number of characters, in fact.

What it really comes down to is you decided that every Dragon Age game was going to be about the Warden, and now you are trying to make it out to be something BioWare did wrong instead of admit that you made a bad assumption.

No I didn't, I never ever said that, stop trying to twist my words.

I never ever said I wanted Dragon age to be all about The Warden.

I did say that I would like some continuation and what happened in Origins to have some relevance on the story of DA2 and into the future.

Well I wasn't quoting you or anything. I'm just saying this is how your argument is coming across. You're clearly upset that DA2 isn't about the Warden, I'm saying (as are others) that they never promised it would be, then you accuse them of "leading us on."

I never said you "wanted" Dragon Age to be all about the Warden either, so stop putting words in my mouth then claiming I'm putting them in yours. All I said was that you expected it to be, which is pretty much what you've been saying. Obviously you wouldn't be so upset if this weren't true.

But anyway, what I was saying after the edit what that we ARE getting some continuation, and what happened in Origins is sure to have some relevance. Why wouldn't it? Even DAO wasn't entirely about the Warden, or to put it differently, things happened that were bigger than the Warden. A Blight was defeated; do you think that won't have any effect on Thedas? Kings and/or a Queen were crowned in Orzammar and Denerim; do you think they'll just sweep that under the rug? The Urn of Sacred Ashes was discovered, and either revealed to believers or tainted...do you think the Chantry will be indifferent?

I have no more inside information than you do, so I can't say for sure that all of these things (or anything else for that matter) will be followed up on, but it seems reasonable, doesn't it? Why jump to the conclusion that they definitively will not, then bash the game for it?

Anyway, since you caught me before the edit (it seemed like an especially long-winded response), I reverted back to pre-edit and will put my much more succinct second draft here:

"It is the start of a larger story that will lead to an end containing the characters and themes started in that origin. Every single character? No."

[Faz432]

aznsoisauce wrote...

Faz432 wrote...

Saibh wrote...

Faz432 wrote...

As I said before, don't lead them on then by calling it an origin.

How does a game called "Dragon Age" indicate that it's the origins of the Warden, and not the series? It would have been leading you on had it been called "The Warden: Origins".

By the fact it's called Dragon Age: ORIGINS.

If you call a story a Origin then that leads you to believe it the start of a larger story that will lead the an end containing the characters and themes started in that origin.

An origin is not at all indicative of where something ends.

You can keep saying "origins" is misleading -and it is, in a way - but it's so aptly descriptive of a game where you can choose from a number of origins for your Grey Warden.

Which then becomes of no significance to the rest of the series.

My point and I think the point of the OP is that we feel lead to believe, and it would be nice if it did.



*Not specifying that it has to be The Warden.

SirOccam wrote...




Well I wasn't quoting you or anything. I'm
just saying this is how your argument is coming across. You're clearly
upset that DA2 isn't about the Warden, I'm saying (as are others) that
they never promised it would be, then you accuse them of "leading us
on."

I never said you "wanted" Dragon Age to be all about the
Warden either, so stop putting words in my mouth then claiming I'm
putting them in yours. [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/tongue.png[/smilie]
All I said was that you expected it to be, which is pretty much what
you've been saying. Obviously you wouldn't be so upset if this weren't
true.

But anyway, what I was saying after the edit what that we
ARE getting some continuation, and what happened in Origins is sure to
have some relevance. Why wouldn't it? Even DAO wasn't entirely about the
Warden, or to put it differently, things happened that were bigger than
the Warden. A Blight was defeated; do you think that won't have any
effect on Thedas? Kings and/or a Queen were crowned in Orzammar and
Denerim; do you think they'll just sweep that under the rug? The Urn of
Sacred Ashes was discovered, and either revealed to believers or
tainted...do you think the Chantry will be indifferent?

I have no
more inside information than you do, so I can't say for sure that all
of these things (or anything else for that matter) will be followed up
on, but it seems reasonable, doesn't it? Why jump to the conclusion that
they definitively will not, then bash the game for it?

Anyway,
since you caught me before the edit (it seemed like an especially
long-winded response), I reverted back to pre-edit and will put my much
more succinct second draft here:

"It is the start of a larger story that will lead to an end containing the characters and themes started in that origin. Every single character? No."

I find it funny that you say you're not trying to put words into my mouth, but then go on to tell me that I'm saying I am upset that Dragon age is not all about the Warden

I'm not upset at all, but it does get a tad frustrating when people are purposely twisting my words. For the only reason I can assume, to try and lead me off point, to debase my argument.

Modifié par Faz432, 10 novembre 2010 - 03:08 .

[Saibh]

Faz432 wrote...

I find it funny that you say you're not trying to put words into my mouth, but then go on to tell me that I'm saying I am upset that Dragon age is not all about the Warden

I'm not upset at all, but it does get a tad frustrating when people are purposely twisting my words.

If you're not upset, and I mean this gently, perhaps you should stop acting like you've been "led" to believe something. That implies you were betrayed somehow.

[Helena Tylena]

If you're not upset, you're at the very least disappointed. And disappointed and upset are very similar emotions when it comes to text-based communication, like a forum.

[Faz432]

Saibh wrote...

Faz432 wrote...

I find it funny that you say you're not trying to put words into my mouth, but then go on to tell me that I'm saying I am upset that Dragon age is not all about the Warden

I'm not upset at all, but it does get a tad frustrating when people are purposely twisting my words.

If you're not upset, and I mean this gently, perhaps you should stop acting like you've been "led" to believe something. That implies you were betrayed somehow.

See my last sentance in the post you quoted.


So now we're on the semantics of being upset?

Brilliant!

Why do you feel the need to be so defensive, trying to lead me away from my original point and might I add the thread topic?

Modifié par Faz432, 10 novembre 2010 - 03:12 .

[Mr. Man]

First of all....it's not DAO2...it's DA2. Second of all, I think it's completely silly to be dismissing a game as 'missing the point' before it's even released. The reasons given were pretty lackluster as well. Why would it have to be in Ferelden for instance? Thedas is a fascinating place, and most of the most interesting things aren't happening in Ferelden. Don't get me wrong, it was a great country, but a want a fresh place.

[In Exile]

Faz432 wrote...
I find it funny that you say you're not trying to put words into my mouth, but then go on to tell me that I'm saying I am upset that Dragon age is not all about the Warden

I'm not upset at all, but it does get a tad frustrating when people are purposely twisting my words. For the only reason I can assume, to try and lead me off point, to debase my argument.

What was the story that started in DA:O? We beat the archdemon. DA:A introduced the architect and Witch Hunt had Morrigan say a "change" was coming. So what exactly is the DA:O story that isn't being continued?

[Hellosanta]

O ho ho, this thread is moving fast! ... with repeated arguments.

[Saibh]

Faz432 wrote...
See my last sentance in the post you quoted.

So now we're on the semantics of being upset?

Brilliant!

Why do you feel the need to be so defensive, trying to lead me away from my original point and might I add the thread topic?

Why did you call me an ass when I replied completely on-topic to you originally? You might argue that that was rather defensive and attempting to lead me away from what I was trying to communicate to you.

Are you denying that you've been repeatedly saying that BioWare led you to believe something? Again, that implies betrayal. It has nothing to do with whether or not you felt betrayed--you simply are acting like it. I'm just relaying what the rest of us are seeing in your posts.

[Onyx Jaguar]

So the real question is, how far off the point has DA 2 missed? Will this Apollo 13 not make its way back home?

[Dave of Canada]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

So the real question is, how far off the point has DA 2 missed? Will this Apollo 13 not make its way back home?

Apollo 13 won't be able to land because the Normandy came and mined the planet too much until it couldn't sustain any life.