222 réponses à ce sujet

[Persephone]

Mezzil wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Mezzil wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Whatever. IMO David Gaider knows HIS characters better than anyone. So pardon me for taking his thoughts over yours.^^

Loghain is Mary Kirby's character.

Who wrote the novels again? On which Loghain was based? David Gaider.

Loghain was made for the game first. The book Loghain is suppose to be based on Mary Kirby's character.

Well, logically the backstory comes first. Makes no sense otherwise. That's also why the novels came out first.

[Addai]

maxernst wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

Mezzil wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Whatever. IMO David Gaider knows HIS characters better than anyone. So pardon me for taking his thoughts over yours.^^

Loghain is Mary Kirby's character.

In-game yes, but he wrote him for the two companion novels and knows the character very well.

Perhaps, but maybe Mary Kirby and Simon Templman had other ideas. 

LOL No they don't.  Unless you're really saying that the lead writer of the game has nothing of value to say about Loghain's motivations?  Or that the writers don't talk to each other?

Game Loghain was created first, however.  Gaider confirmed this in an old thread about The Stolen Throne, that Loghain had been conceived of for the game and then he wrote the companion novels based on that conception.  He also said "both Mary and I had a good sense of who the character is."

But, whatever.  I'm not trying to steal your lunch money.  If you don't think Gaider's reflections have any bearing, that's fine.  I just prefer a fuller sense of the story given by the writers' character notes.

[Ryzaki]

Personally I take a "The writer is dead" approach. Writers aren't gods and sometimes will make up things on the fly. Not saying Gaider did but I've been burned once and never again. What I interpret from the game/book/movie is what I base my opinion on. Not some messages in a forum or an interview.

[Persephone]

Addai67 wrote...

maxernst wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

Mezzil wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Whatever. IMO David Gaider knows HIS characters better than anyone. So pardon me for taking his thoughts over yours.^^

Loghain is Mary Kirby's character.

In-game yes, but he wrote him for the two companion novels and knows the character very well.

Perhaps, but maybe Mary Kirby and Simon Templman had other ideas. 

LOL No they don't.  Unless you're really saying that the lead writer of the game has nothing of value to say about Loghain's motivations?  Or that the writers don't talk to each other?

Game Loghain was created first, however.  Gaider confirmed this in an old thread about The Stolen Throne, that Loghain had been conceived of for the game and then he wrote the companion novels based on that conception.  He also said "both Mary and I had a good sense of who the character is."

But, whatever.  I'm not trying to steal your lunch money.  If you don't think Gaider's reflections have any bearing, that's fine.  I just prefer a fuller sense of the story given by the writers' character notes.

*Stands corrected* I could have sworn that the novels came first. I mean, aren't backstories created first usually? I do believe though that book & game Loghain clash in several ways.

[maxernst]

Ryzaki wrote...

Personally I take a "The writer is dead" approach. Writers aren't gods and sometimes will make up things on the fly. Not saying Gaider did but I've been burned once and never again. What I interpret from the game/book/movie is what I base my opinion on. Not some messages in a forum or an interview.

Exactly.  And I really respect writers a lot more if they're willing to say  that wasn't really what I had in mind, but it's a perfectly valid interpretation.  And by the way, with respect to how the Dark Ritual works, DG has said exaclty that--they had more specific ideas, but it was never explicitly stated, so other views are possible. 

[Persephone]

maxernst wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Personally I take a "The writer is dead" approach. Writers aren't gods and sometimes will make up things on the fly. Not saying Gaider did but I've been burned once and never again. What I interpret from the game/book/movie is what I base my opinion on. Not some messages in a forum or an interview.

Exactly.  And I really respect writers a lot more if they're willing to say  that wasn't really what I had in mind, but it's a perfectly valid interpretation.  And by the way, with respect to how the Dark Ritual works, DG has said exaclty that--they had more specific ideas, but it was never explicitly stated, so other views are possible. 

I disagree. If I could get a Shakespeare's detailed views on his own work, I'd lap it up like a cat does its milk. (Not saying that DG or MK are of that calibre) And it would matter more to me than all Shakespeare scholars combined.:happy:

[Ryzaki]

maxernst wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Personally I take a "The writer is dead" approach. Writers aren't gods and sometimes will make up things on the fly. Not saying Gaider did but I've been burned once and never again. What I interpret from the game/book/movie is what I base my opinion on. Not some messages in a forum or an interview.

Exactly.  And I really respect writers a lot more if they're willing to say  that wasn't really what I had in mind, but it's a perfectly valid interpretation.  And by the way, with respect to how the Dark Ritual works, DG has said exaclty that--they had more specific ideas, but it was never explicitly stated, so other views are possible. 

Yes that's another issue.

Really though I don't mind when writers point out other ways of interpretation because that's frankly intersting but taking it as gospel because the writer says that's what they ment? No. Only if the medium supports it. If the medium doesn't support it I could care less what they intended because that's not what it came off as.

You don't build a business computer and tell someone you meant to build a gaming rig and for them to consider it as such.

[Persephone]

Ryzaki wrote...

maxernst wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Personally I take a "The writer is dead" approach. Writers aren't gods and sometimes will make up things on the fly. Not saying Gaider did but I've been burned once and never again. What I interpret from the game/book/movie is what I base my opinion on. Not some messages in a forum or an interview.

Exactly.  And I really respect writers a lot more if they're willing to say  that wasn't really what I had in mind, but it's a perfectly valid interpretation.  And by the way, with respect to how the Dark Ritual works, DG has said exaclty that--they had more specific ideas, but it was never explicitly stated, so other views are possible. 

Yes that's another issue.

Really though I don't mind when writers point out other ways of interpretation because that's frankly intersting but taking it as gospel because the writer says that's what they ment? No. Only if the medium supports it. If the medium doesn't support it I could care less what they intended because that's not what it came off as.

You don't build a business computer and tell someone you meant to build a gaming rig and for them to consider it as such.

There's the crux: The medium supports it to me 100%. Much more so than any "Evilz Traitorz!" interpretation I have ever come across. It supports what I, after recruiting him and taking the trouble to shut off my earlier bias, already concluded. Not to mention reading the books.

[Sarah1281]

BlazingSpeed wrote...

If so, I can
shed some light on what my thoughts regarding it are. You can take them
for what it's worth -- if there's no evidence of something in the game
it's debateable whether that can be taken as truth, after all.

Wow, I read through a good ten pages in that topic and even the TC of Loghain's defense missed what I put in bold so DG said that Loghain didn't have anything to do with the Cousland murder but Loghain did poison Eamon beyond a shadow of a doubt based on in game evidence and the fact Loghain was planning a coup against Cailan not even knowing about the RTO letters HM.....

Missed it? Hardly.

This seems like an appropriate time for this: 

[maxernst]

Persephone wrote...

maxernst wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Personally I take a "The writer is dead" approach. Writers aren't gods and sometimes will make up things on the fly. Not saying Gaider did but I've been burned once and never again. What I interpret from the game/book/movie is what I base my opinion on. Not some messages in a forum or an interview.

Exactly.  And I really respect writers a lot more if they're willing to say  that wasn't really what I had in mind, but it's a perfectly valid interpretation.  And by the way, with respect to how the Dark Ritual works, DG has said exaclty that--they had more specific ideas, but it was never explicitly stated, so other views are possible. 

I disagree. If I could get a Shakespeare's detailed views on his own work, I'd lap it up like a cat does its milk. (Not saying that DG or MK are of that calibre) And it would matter more to me than all Shakespeare scholars combined.:happy:

Definitely disagree with that, most especially with Shakespeare.  The beauty of Shakespeare is its fluidity.  The reason Hamlet is such a classic play is because it allows so much scope for the actor to interpret the motivations of the character differently. 

Besides, I have a feeling that Shakespeare was actually mostly concerned with writing a good story and might not have as much to say about the deeper meanings of his work as you might think.

[Persephone]

Sarah1281 wrote...

BlazingSpeed wrote...

If so, I can
shed some light on what my thoughts regarding it are. You can take them
for what it's worth -- if there's no evidence of something in the game
it's debateable whether that can be taken as truth, after all.

Wow, I read through a good ten pages in that topic and even the TC of Loghain's defense missed what I put in bold so DG said that Loghain didn't have anything to do with the Cousland murder but Loghain did poison Eamon beyond a shadow of a doubt based on in game evidence and the fact Loghain was planning a coup against Cailan not even knowing about the RTO letters HM.....

Missed it? Hardly.

This seems like an appropriate time for this: 

That is made of PURE WIN. :wub::wub: Even if it is from that cutscene I will never ever see again, thank the Maker!

[Persephone]

maxernst wrote...

Persephone wrote...

maxernst wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Personally I take a "The writer is dead" approach. Writers aren't gods and sometimes will make up things on the fly. Not saying Gaider did but I've been burned once and never again. What I interpret from the game/book/movie is what I base my opinion on. Not some messages in a forum or an interview.

Exactly.  And I really respect writers a lot more if they're willing to say  that wasn't really what I had in mind, but it's a perfectly valid interpretation.  And by the way, with respect to how the Dark Ritual works, DG has said exaclty that--they had more specific ideas, but it was never explicitly stated, so other views are possible. 

I disagree. If I could get a Shakespeare's detailed views on his own work, I'd lap it up like a cat does its milk. (Not saying that DG or MK are of that calibre) And it would matter more to me than all Shakespeare scholars combined.:happy:

Definitely disagree with that, most especially with Shakespeare.  The beauty of Shakespeare is its fluidity.  The reason Hamlet is such a classic play is because it allows so much scope for the actor to interpret the motivations of the character differently. 

Besides, I have a feeling that Shakespeare was actually mostly concerned with writing a good story and might not have as much to say about the deeper meanings of his work as you might think.

Perfectly fine to see it that way. I prefer first hand sources to second hand interpretations though. I make up my own mind in the end, anyway. But Nicholas Sanders' description of Anne Boleyn as a vile, hare lipped, six fingered creature who was actually Henry VIII's daughter shows what damage second hand information/interpretation can do. Most people STILL believe Anne Boleyn had six fingers on one hand.

[maxernst]

Persephone wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

maxernst wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Personally I take a "The writer is dead" approach. Writers aren't gods and sometimes will make up things on the fly. Not saying Gaider did but I've been burned once and never again. What I interpret from the game/book/movie is what I base my opinion on. Not some messages in a forum or an interview.

Exactly.  And I really respect writers a lot more if they're willing to say  that wasn't really what I had in mind, but it's a perfectly valid interpretation.  And by the way, with respect to how the Dark Ritual works, DG has said exaclty that--they had more specific ideas, but it was never explicitly stated, so other views are possible. 

Yes that's another issue.

Really though I don't mind when writers point out other ways of interpretation because that's frankly intersting but taking it as gospel because the writer says that's what they ment? No. Only if the medium supports it. If the medium doesn't support it I could care less what they intended because that's not what it came off as.

You don't build a business computer and tell someone you meant to build a gaming rig and for them to consider it as such.

There's the crux: The medium supports it to me 100%. Much more so than any "Evilz Traitorz!" interpretation I have ever come across. It supports what I, after recruiting him and taking the trouble to shut off my earlier bias, already concluded. Not to mention reading the books.

But that's fundamentally why it's subjective.  To me, the medium doesn't support it very well at all.  I found it quite striking on another thread (I think it was the best computer game characters ever) that you cited how convincing you found his Landsmeet transition and that pivotal scene is the crux of the problem for me:  I found it unconvincing.  I couldn't suspend disbelief.

[Ryzaki]

Persephone wrote...

There's the crux: The medium supports it to me 100%. Much more so than any "Evilz Traitorz!" interpretation I have ever come across. It supports what I, after recruiting him and taking the trouble to shut off my earlier bias, already concluded. Not to mention reading the books.

Yes the game completely doesn't support him betraying Cailan from the beginning even the voice acting is completely off.

I'm no going to argue about it. You have your interpretation and I have mine.

Also please don't dumb the argument down to simplicty because I can do the same thing "I Loghain! I don't care what he does!"

It's juvenile.

Edit @above poster: And yes his "ORLESIAN SPIES!!! *frothing at the mouth*" 

one beatdown later.

"Hero of Fereldan! <3"

Was jaring and made me facepalm.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 18 décembre 2010 - 04:37 .

[Persephone]

maxernst wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

maxernst wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Personally I take a "The writer is dead" approach. Writers aren't gods and sometimes will make up things on the fly. Not saying Gaider did but I've been burned once and never again. What I interpret from the game/book/movie is what I base my opinion on. Not some messages in a forum or an interview.

Exactly.  And I really respect writers a lot more if they're willing to say  that wasn't really what I had in mind, but it's a perfectly valid interpretation.  And by the way, with respect to how the Dark Ritual works, DG has said exaclty that--they had more specific ideas, but it was never explicitly stated, so other views are possible. 

Yes that's another issue.

Really though I don't mind when writers point out other ways of interpretation because that's frankly intersting but taking it as gospel because the writer says that's what they ment? No. Only if the medium supports it. If the medium doesn't support it I could care less what they intended because that's not what it came off as.

You don't build a business computer and tell someone you meant to build a gaming rig and for them to consider it as such.

There's the crux: The medium supports it to me 100%. Much more so than any "Evilz Traitorz!" interpretation I have ever come across. It supports what I, after recruiting him and taking the trouble to shut off my earlier bias, already concluded. Not to mention reading the books.

But that's fundamentally why it's subjective.  To me, the medium doesn't support it very well at all.  I found it quite striking on another thread (I think it was the best computer game characters ever) that you cited how convincing you found his Landsmeet transition and that pivotal scene is the crux of the problem for me:  I found it unconvincing.  I couldn't suspend disbelief.

Which is perfectly fine. There is no way of interpreting such a polarizing/shades of grey character that everyone will agree with 100%. I read everything on this character than I can find, always on the lookout for details I might have missed. I might disagree with many of the negative views, mind you, but they are interesting to read. Which other character in DAO sparks such fierce loyalty and merciless wrath at the same time? None. Just shows how awesome he is, no matter if it's as a villain or as a fallen hero.

[Persephone]

Ryzaki wrote...

Persephone wrote...

There's the crux: The medium supports it to me 100%. Much more so than any "Evilz Traitorz!" interpretation I have ever come across. It supports what I, after recruiting him and taking the trouble to shut off my earlier bias, already concluded. Not to mention reading the books.

Yes the game completely doesn't support him betraying Cailan from the beginning even the voice acting is completely off.

I'm no going to argue about it. You have your interpretation and I have mine.

Also please don't dumb the argument down to simplicty because I can do the same thing "I Loghain! I don't care what he does!"

It's juvenile.

Edit: And yes his "ORLESIAN SPIES!!! *frothing at the mouth*" 

one beatdown later.

"Hero of Fereldan! <3"

Was jaring and made me facepalm.

The voice acting isn't off to me. Either way.

You tell me not to simplify matters, yet do it yourself in the Edit? 

[Ryzaki]

Persephone wrote...
The voice acting isn't off to me. Either way.

You tell me not to simplify matters, yet do it yourself in the Edit? 

What pray tell did I simply your views? 

Not the matters themselves but your point of view? 

You simplfied the whole execution as simply being because I thought he was a "evil traitorz!" that are a multitude of reasons for killing him and some have nothing to do with his treason at all.

And also that was mocking your "Evul traitor!" you realize? 

And the VA is way off to me. But personal preferences.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 18 décembre 2010 - 04:40 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Wonderful, now we can't agree on what's canon, making any debate even more useless than it is. As if DA:O needed something else to kill it.

[Ryzaki]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Wonderful, now we can't agree on what's canon, making any debate even more useless than it is. As if DA:O needed something else to kill it.

No offense KoP but I had enough BS with people pulling out "Well the author said X!!!!" on the Harry Potter boards.

I got sick of it in a hurry.

And DAO would be worse considering there's multiple writers who may have the same general consensus but might have slight differences between them. Those slight differences are still different views.

HP itself is vastly confusing in characterization and it only had one author.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 18 décembre 2010 - 04:42 .

[maxernst]

Persephone wrote...

maxernst wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

maxernst wrote...

Which other character in DAO sparks such fierce loyalty and merciless wrath at the same time? None.

Disagree with this, too.  Alistiar, Morrigan, and maybe Zevran have sparked equally hot debates, though the Alistair/Loghain ones are often intertwined, and I guess the romanceable characters have an edge because you see so much more of them.  Loghain has greater plot significance than any of them, though.  There are a lot of good characters in DA:O that inspire strong feelings. 

Modifié par maxernst, 18 décembre 2010 - 04:41 .

[Persephone]

Ryzaki wrote...

Persephone wrote...
The voice acting isn't off to me. Either way.

You tell me not to simplify matters, yet do it yourself in the Edit? 

What pray tell did I simply your views? 

Notthe matters themselves but your point of view? 

And also that was mocking your "Evul traitor!" you realize? 

And the VA is way off to me. But personal preferences.

Simplifying a key moment/turning point in the game. Oh, I realize the meaning of the .

[Persephone]

maxernst wrote...

Persephone wrote...

maxernst wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

maxernst wrote...

Which other character in DAO sparks such fierce loyalty and merciless wrath at the same time? None.

Disagree with this, too.  Alistiar, Morrigan, and maybe Zevran have sparked equally hot debates, though the Alistair/Loghain ones are often intertwined, and I guess the romanceable characters have an edge because you see so much more of them.  Loghain has greater plot significance than any of them, though.  There are a lot of good characters in DA:O that inspire strong feelings. 

None of them. as far as I have seen has dominated such debates like Loghain. None. But maybe I missed a lot.

[Ryzaki]

Persephone wrote...

Simplifying a key moment/turning point in the game. Oh, I realize the meaning of the .

I didn't see that as a key moment. Just something that needed to hurry up and get over with.

Now they key moment I felt was Morrigan's deal. That was key.

And hey turnabout is fair play. You don't reduce me to a bloodthirsty fanatic and I won't reduce you to a simpering fangirl. A fair exchange no? 

[KnightofPhoenix]

Ryzaki wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Wonderful, now we can't agree on what's canon, making any debate even more useless than it is. As if DA:O needed something else to kill it.

No offense KoP but I had enough BS with people pulling out "Well the author said X!!!!" on the Harry Potter boards.

I got sick of it in a hurry.

Yea, I got sick of Star Wars because its author happens to be a ******, coupled with most others.
Still doesn't change what is canon, and what I think ought to have been canon. So I simply stopped caring.

Play the game however you want, if we can't agree on the premise that authors happen to know their story and game better than us, there is no point discussing anything,

[Persephone]

Ryzaki wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Wonderful, now we can't agree on what's canon, making any debate even more useless than it is. As if DA:O needed something else to kill it.

No offense KoP but I had enough BS with people pulling out "Well the author said X!!!!" on the Harry Potter boards.

I got sick of it in a hurry.

And DAO would be worse considering there's multiple writers who may have the same general consensus but might have slight differences between them. Those slight differences are still different views.

HP itself is vastly confusing in characterization and it only had one author.

One author doesn't stand for every other author. HP is not DAO. JKR being infuriating doesn't condemn every other author in this world.