57019 réponses à ce sujet

[twilekaoi]

I think there's sort of a difference between Anders and characters like Sten, Velanna...

Players who recruited those two probably sought for them to redeem themselves. I recruited them for that reason...
Anders on the otherhand drags you along, and even outright lies to you; "I have a spell that splits Justice from my body, will you help me my love?". Fenris is a byproduct of a messed up past, though I guess the same could be said for Velanna, Leliana, Zevran, etc. A static past that the Warden/Hawke had no part of. That can't really be compared to Anders, who at the beginning of act 1, always had a choice and knew right away that Justice had turned into Vengeance despite companions and Hawke urging him that he's "going too deep".

That viscount scene was one of the most disturbing to me, because it's just another form of extremism (replace Qun, Viscount with Mage freedom, Elthina). The fact that Anders does that very same premise in act 3, just... ugh. I honestly don't see how anyone could like Anders after that.

[Renmiri1]

well you can read 2,000 pages of reasons to love the character or you can respect that people view things differently. To me Anders and Zevran and Sten and Velanna commit heinous acts but redeem themselves before and after. You don't see it that way, but I do and I don't think we can change each other's minds.

[twilekaoi]

I'm not denying the fact, nor have I ever, that people can like Anders, I'm simply stating my opinions and reasons of why I don't like him. It goes both ways. Just because a person has a different viewpoint on a character doesn't mean he/she doesn't see different sides to it.

I should also note AGAIN that he was my romance, supported his manifesto when it meant something other than desperate murder, gave him a key to my estate, he saved my favorite character companion in the game (Bethany), I let him live despite Sebastion leaving whom was a very active party member of mine. If Anders does deserve any hate from that one act, he, well deserves it. He even says so himself, "I will not deny anyone Justice", if Hawke decides to take Justice stupidly in his/her hands.

I genuinely feel he is now a cold, lying character with good albeit extreme intentions. Much like Loghain in The Stolen Throne. That said, I don't want to kill him, nor do I want to see him dead out of respect for saving Bethany. But if Sebastion ends up getting justice in DA3, I'll mourn, but mostly because of how my Hawke was betrayed. White knight all you want, and I can understand that, but it doesn't change the fact of his character. Justice or otherwise.

Modifié par twilekaoi, 01 mai 2013 - 07:53 .

[Caeleinn]

Tension breaker! 

(and a blantant excuse to post more awesome art from GivethemHorns at Deviant Art...)



Yeah, this is currently gracing my desktop as the wallpaper...hard to get any writing done...

[twilekaoi]

I'm sorry if I created any tension-- I didn't mean to ruin the mood by speaking how I feel... Believe it or not, I was once emotionally attached to Anders... maybe I still am, a little. I mean, my Hawke let him go right? If I weren't so invested in the character, I wouldn't even care to post... just so disappointed in his actions.

Maybe him and his fate unfold in DA3 (if he's in it), and a path to redemption (if he truly meant it) would make my Hawkes heart unbroken. It would have to be something big though. Like Warden sacrifice big...

[Caeleinn]

You didn't ruin the mood.  I just wanted an excuse to post a pic of Anders in a Grumpy Cat hoodie with kitty ears.

Everyone has their own opinion about Anders.  The fact that people feel so strongly about him (love or hate) means that he is a fantastically written character. On that we can all agree, I think.  Personally, I am a little squicked over his actions at the end of DA2, but at the same time, I am able to step back as a player and see how he descended to that point.  In Awakenings, he's a bit carefree and almost "lalalala" (imagine a skipping Anders there...), until Justice asks him in one of the party banters if he ever stops to think about the fate of other mages.  Anders replies with something along the lines of "Not really", and Justice is the one to tell him that he should.  Later, in DA2, in a party banter with Isabela, he tells her how he sometimes wishes he could be that selfish again.  For me, those two moments are an insite into the Anders/Justice relationship...yeah, Anders couldn't stand being trapped in the Circle, and he hated how the Templars treated the mages...but it wasn't until he merged with Justice that things really went bad.  Honestly, I think that carefree Anders is still inside somewhere, but Justice beat him down and overpowered his personality, giving us that really emo Anders.

I love Anders because he is kinda broken, and something within me wants so badly to 'fix' him and make it all better.  Like if I could just find the right words, Justice would go away and stop forcing Anders to do these things that he doesn't really want to do.  You can see that side of him if you rivalmance him.  *Sigh*  I think that is why I"m writing an apparently epic length story about him, in an attempt to 'fix' the problem.

Ugh, wall of text.  Apparenly, I ramble when I is sleepy.  TL:DR: Justice made Anders moopy and do bad things.  As Varric once said, "Go away, Justice.  Can Anders come out to play?"

[ReiKokoFuuu]

Caeleinn wrote...

Everyone has their own opinion about Anders.  The fact that people feel so strongly about him (love or hate) means that he is a fantastically written character. On that we can all agree, I think.  Personally, I am a little squicked over his actions at the end of DA2, but at the same time, I am able to step back as a player and see how he descended to that point.  In Awakenings, he's a bit carefree and almost "lalalala" (imagine a skipping Anders there...), until Justice asks him in one of the party banters if he ever stops to think about the fate of other mages.  Anders replies with something along the lines of "Not really", and Justice is the one to tell him that he should.  Later, in DA2, in a party banter with Isabela, he tells her how he sometimes wishes he could be that selfish again.  For me, those two moments are an insite into the Anders/Justice relationship...yeah, Anders couldn't stand being trapped in the Circle, and he hated how the Templars treated the mages...but it wasn't until he merged with Justice that things really went bad.  Honestly, I think that carefree Anders is still inside somewhere, but Justice beat him down and overpowered his personality, giving us that really emo Anders.

I love Anders because he is kinda broken, and something within me wants so badly to 'fix' him and make it all better.  Like if I could just find the right words, Justice would go away and stop forcing Anders to do these things that he doesn't really want to do.  You can see that side of him if you rivalmance him.  *Sigh*  I think that is why I"m writing an apparently epic length story about him, in an attempt to 'fix' the problem.

Ugh, wall of text.  Apparenly, I ramble when I is sleepy.  TL:DR: Justice made Anders moopy and do bad things.  As Varric once said, "Go away, Justice.  Can Anders come out to play?"

that is exactly how i see anders.  at first, i chose to romance him cos i thought fenris was ugly, but over time, he grew on me and as i got to know anders more, i really started to see him as a broken man who was fighting to stay true to himelf, but at the same time, he's gradually losing pieces of himself to justice and his cause.  my canon hawke is similarly a broken man who's also trying to weather the storm he calls his life, but at least he doesn't have a spirit dragging him into the depths like anders does.

i tend to be very drawn to broken people, i'm not sure why.  i just know that i want to fix them, like you said, or at the very least show them that they're not alone, that i'm there for them and will do whatever i can to help. 

[Renmiri1]

same here... Broken man.. Mmmm.

[Renmiri1]

lol from the meme thread

[Nilfalasiel]

Renmiri1 wrote...

well you can read 2,000 pages of reasons to love the character or you can respect that people view things differently. To me Anders and Zevran and Sten and Velanna commit heinous acts but redeem themselves before and after. You don't see it that way, but I do and I don't think we can change each other's minds.

My memory's hazy here, but does Velanna ever actually express regret for what she did? I don't remember her showing much remorse.

I've also got another major candidate for that list: Isabela. She starts a frickin' Qunari invasion out of greed. Innocent people actually do die because of her selfishness. And yet she's a fan favourite.

[dontwantanacc]

Glad someone else noticed the Isabela thing. Not just an invasion of Kirkwall but potentially putting the whole of the Free Marches at war against the Qunari - Arishok's last words, "We shall return...." (queue dramatic music).
Regardless of whether you recruit her or not, it's still her fault. And if she comes back in Act 3, does anyone seem particularly bothered by what she did? Not really, nope.
IMO, what she did was just as bad, if not worse, than what Anders did but, the scenes were written completely differently.

[twilekaoi]

oh wow Isabela comes back in Act 3? At the end of Act 2, I told her to give the tome back to the Qunari, but she ran off with it and never came back. I was half expecting a follow-up quest to hunt her down or something; I would've fought her too if it came down to it. Never had her in my party, didn't like the way she ****d herself out so I wasn't too broken up about it.

Though was still mad at her nonetheless, but in hindsight (and for the sake of discussion) didn't she confess that she stole the tome? And in fairness, Hawke didn't have anything to do with the actual act of stealing it, can't say the same for that Anders quest... So in my opinion, that still puts Isabela in the same rank of Leliana, Zevran, Sten; i.e., characters that had a static past that the Warden/Hawke had no part of.

The death of innocents is definitely a combination of Isabela's greed -- although if I remember right, she stole the tome as a sort of payment to Castilon for freeing slaves? -- and the Arishok's extremism to the Qun. Furthermore, the Arishok's invasion wasn't even a result of the theft, at least initially... Weren't they there for 3-4 years? I was under the impression the invasion was a result of the Arishok seeing the vile injustice Kirkwall treats its citzens and the Chantry zealots attacks on Qunari, and those two facetors pushed him over the egde. Isabela would have contributed to it of course, because them being stuck there was a result of her. But not the invasion per se... at least directly.

With Anders, it's only him (err though I guess Hawke can be counted as a direct contribution... grrr, I hate lies!); no combination of other individuals in that "remove the chance of compromise, because there is no compromise" premise. I think Anders would be more comparable to Sister Petrice, in that he had a direct motive and would be willing to "sacrifice" innocents to show injustice (Viscount son). Petrice also speaks in the same extremism as Anders, no middle ground.

I don't know much about Isabela though, since she left me in Act 2... Has anyone romanced Isabela? I'm curious to know what the comparisons to an Anders romance is.

Modifié par twilekaoi, 03 mai 2013 - 08:32 .

[Caeleinn]

A bit about Isabela from the Dragon Age 2 wiki:

"It's possible that Isabela will permanently leave the party at the end of the quest to retrieve the Qunari relic called the Tome of Koslun near the end of Act 2. It turns out that Isabela stole the tome from the Orlesians, who were giving it back to the Qunari. While fleeing a pursuing Qunari dreadnought, both it and Isabela's ship were caught in a storm and shipwrecked. If romanced, or having a high enough friendship or rivalry, she will return at the end of the same act to return the relic to the Qunari, saying that Hawke's influence was what made her come back. It is at this point that the opportunity presents itself to surrender her to the Qunari, or to duel the Arishok for her life. Defeating the Arishok will cause Isabela to rejoin the party with the option of continuing her romance."

She totally screwed me in my first playthrough and left me at the end of Act 2.  She came back in my second time through because I'd gotten my friendship with her high enough.  And seriously, there is some really great info on that wiki.  I refer to it constantly when I'm playing, especially on quests and how my companions might respond to a particular action.  It helps if I'm trying to get friendship or rival levels up.  It's surprisingly easy to rival Sebastian, for example...and somehow, I managed to get both Anders and Fenris to 100% friend on the same playthrough.  I still ran away with Anders at the end of that playthrough, though.   The only character I haven't dallied with is Merrill, and that is because I just see her as a naive little sister somehow. lol

Modifié par Caeleinn, 03 mai 2013 - 09:05 .

[ReiKokoFuuu]

i've romanced isabela a couple of times, and it's an ok romance to me. her romance is definitely MUCH healthier than anders' though. while you're scrabbling to keep anders from losing himself to justice and his cause, hawke's commitment to isabela (on the friendmace path, i don't think i ever rivalmanced her) eventually makes her realise that she was just afraid of being loved, due to her past. to get her to return at the end of act 2 with the tome, you either have to romance her or have her friendship/rivalry at 75% or higher, i believe. i'm not sure if telling her to give the tome back to the qunari outside the foundry will cause her to leave permanently, as i've never picked that option. if she comes back, you have the option of defending isabela or handing her over to the qunari.

although i don't agree with what she did (hiding the fact that her relic was the tome of koslun and the reason why the qunari were camping in kirkwall for years), the whole mess started cos she freed a lot of slaves, so in my book, she's not all bad.

yeah, sten killed people over a sword, but he showed remorse for what he did and he joined the warden so he could atone for his actions, or at least die for a good cause.

velanna......i just hated her from day 1 >.>

[Gyrefalcon]

Anders acted without the player. This is the true affront. It simply isn't *done*. You can play almost any other R.P.G. and the N.P.C.'s will laud you for any action you take and dub you a hero even if you go around assassinating people and wreaking havoc. But here? The decision is taken from you. Even people who agreed with Anders that the actions of the Chantry, through the Templars it commands, required a drastic response did not like being locked out of this part of the story.

And that is why it breaks boundaries and really polarizes fans. Everyone wants to believe their side is right and just and good, but when seen from the outside, would your character be seen as a hero or as a bloody fighter who would take on any cause for the right amount of coin? It is a cutting-edge move in the game industry, and it is part of what makes this game and series of games stand out from the pack.

As for Isabella and the rest, all your companions are bone-heads.  They all have some driving desire causing them to implode (Fenris and his family) or explode (Isabella/Qunari, Marill/Dalish, Anders/Chantry).  And being their friends and having the "Now don't play with that..." speech does NOT change them!  One deep heart-to-heart does not veer your companions from destruction.  Nearly all of them feel bad later, but none stop their head-long plunge off the cliff.  It really makes you wonder how Hawke is doing mentally since you tend to be drawn to people who have the same amount of emotional scarring as you.  (And Hawke's sane friends won't date him/her, ha ha ha!)

I am really interested in seeing where the story goes.  Depending on how things fall out, people may despise or lionize Anders hundreds of years later.  History lauds winners.  But with the darkspawn a constant threat, massive in-fighting and personal wars could kill everyone.  Inquisition should be very interesting indeed.

Modifié par Gyrefalcon, 04 mai 2013 - 09:42 .

[Nilfalasiel]

twilekaoi wrote...

The death of innocents is definitely a combination of Isabela's greed -- although if I remember right, she stole the tome as a sort of payment to Castilon for freeing slaves? -- and the Arishok's extremism to the Qun. Furthermore, the Arishok's invasion wasn't even a result of the theft, at least initially... Weren't they there for 3-4 years? I was under the impression the invasion was a result of the Arishok seeing the vile injustice Kirkwall treats its citzens and the Chantry zealots attacks on Qunari, and those two facetors pushed him over the egde. Isabela would have contributed to it of course, because them being stuck there was a result of her. But not the invasion per se... at least directly.

The Qunari arrived in Kirkwall in pursuit of Isabela and the Tome of Koslun, and they wouldn't leave until they found it. So their continued stay in Kirkwall was directly her fault. It doesn't matter what triggered the assault in the end: it was inevitable. But Isabela's theft is what made it inevitable.

ReiKokoFuuu wrote...

although i don't agree with what she did (hiding the fact that her relic was the tome of koslun and the reason why the qunari were camping in kirkwall for years), the whole mess started cos she freed a lot of slaves, so in my book, she's not all bad.

And yet, she's perfectly ok with letting Castillon off scot free when you confront him in Act 3: "Just give me your ship, and I'll conveniently forget that you're a slaver".

So much for compassion, Isabela. Needless to say, she never gets that ship in my playthroughs.

I'm also interested in how Fenris views her after that, in the event that neither of them is romanced (ie. they have hooked up). I'd say that the hookup prooooobably stops right there.

yeah, sten killed people over a sword, but he showed remorse for what he did and he joined the warden so he could atone for his actions, or at least die for a good cause.

And Anders is fully ready to die for what he did as well. It is justice, after all. Or, at least, it's justice in the way that Act 3 Justice sees it: eye for an eye; or vengeance, in other words. DAA Justice would most likely have had him stay alive and atone (he advises Velanna something similar in one of their banters).

Modifié par Nilfalasiel, 04 mai 2013 - 11:01 .

[Renmiri1]

My posts from another thread bashing Anders

Renmiri1 wrote...

9/11 polarized the topic of terrorism. I don't think an entire Star Trek series based on ex-terrorists (Bjorans) having a heroine that was part of the resistance confessing to killing non-combatant Kardassians for political reasons would be possible today.

Today Gul Dukat would be more of a hero than Major Kira. Yet Anders and Kira are quite similar in their convictions and actions.

Renmiri1 wrote...

History is written by the winners. Before Israel was established there were some radical zionists that did terrorist acts for the cause of a jewish state.

The same terrorists were later top men in IDF (Israeli Defense Force) and Israeli politics, and are hailed as heroes. Google Menachem Begin

Menachem Begin was an Israeli politician, founder of Likud and the sixth Prime Minister of the State of Israel. Before independence, he was the leader of the Zionist militant group Irgun, the Revisionist breakaway from the larger Jewish paramilitary organization Haganah. He proclaimed a revolt, on 1 February 1944, against the British mandatory government, which was opposed by the Jewish Agency. As head of the Irgun, he targeted the British in Palestine.

One man's terrorist is another man's "freedom fighter" . It depends on who gets to write the history books.

Are you telling me Tevinter Archmages DIDN'T call Andraste and her merry band "terrorists" ? Orlesians didn't call  Marric and his band "terrorists" ? 

Modifié par Renmiri1, 04 mai 2013 - 06:02 .

[Renmiri1]

--> Blows up people for years, part of an armed group created just for that purpose. Never faced a murder knife or a hater from fandom

--> Heals people for years, protects refugees, saves mages. Blows up people ONCE. Haters wanna burn him with fire

[ReiKokoFuuu]

Nilfalasiel wrote...
And yet, she's perfectly ok with letting Castillon off scot free when you confront him in Act 3: "Just give me your ship, and I'll conveniently forget that you're a slaver".

So much for compassion, Isabela. Needless to say, she never gets that ship in my playthroughs.

that is one thing i always failed to fully comprehend, too.......the fact that isabela and castillon are both willing to let bygones be bygones with one simple blackmail and there was nothing stopping castillon from going back on his word once isabela hands over the documents.  castillon seemed very cheerful for someone who lost 'valuable cargo' (the slaves), wasted several years hounding isabela, only to lose to her again.  i put it down to lazy writing...

[twilekaoi]

Renmiri1 wrote...

Are you telling me Tevinter Archmages DIDN'T call Andraste and her merry band "terrorists" ? Orlesians didn't call  Marric and his band "terrorists" ? 

Not comparable since the situations you provided are entirely different from each other. Terrorism is a politically motivated, premeditated violence made against noncombatants to influence an audience. This is exactly what Anders did.

The Orlesians who occupied Ferelden were usurpers; (in a monarch setting) one who takes something not rightfully theirs by force or by illegal means. Prince Maric, whose mother is called "the Rebel Queen" by Gaidner himself, was murdered by Ferelden nobles looking to please the Orlesian king so that he wouldn't take away their land. Joined by Loghain, a farmer boy whose mother was raped and killed by Orlesian Chevaliers. They are rebels, not terrorists.

A rebel is someone who rises up against a ruler or government in armed resistance. This cannot be compared to terrorism, in that they're just taking back what's rightfully theirs: Ferelden freedom and dethroning an Orlesian usurper (who murdered, raped, killed for fun) in Ferelden land. Not once in The Stolen Throne did Maric or Loghain kill an innocent to sway an audience to their cause. That's right, Loghain.

That same argument can be said for Andraste and Maferath. The Tevinters were going all around Thedas taking people from villages by force and making them into slaves/killing them in blood magic rituals. Andraste, one of those very slaves. I should also mention that the Tevinters ruled their own citizens under the brutal hand of the magisters. In retaliation, the exalted march was conceived, against the Tevinter magisters, not the innocent populace. In fact, just the opposite: according to codex entries, Andraste was marching to free "the people of the Imperium". That, is not a terrorist.

Blowing up a few innocent priests (some who probably sympathized with the mages, oh the irony), the Grand Cleric, lying to your lover/friends and willing to sacrifice an entire circle via Annulment for his "Justice"? Oh, Anders deserves the hate. He even said so himself. What's disturbing about all this is that Anders even compares himself to Andraste. He absolutely cannot be compared to Andraste OR Maric. No, he is comparable to Sister Petrice or the Arishok(note: not all Qunari would have acted the same way). Terrorists.

His love for cats is admirable, he was caring as a healer, even I can see that. But that was almost a decade ago. This isn't the same Anders from Awakening (total 180), Act 1 and 2. With Awakening in mind, he is a renegade terrorist (companion armor upgrade); "a person who deserts and betrays an organization, or set of principles".

Modifié par twilekaoi, 06 mai 2013 - 05:42 .

[berelinde]

It's a video game. A lot of people insist on applying real-world morality and terminology to a fictional universe, and I suppose it's only fair, since the fictional universe was created to minimize the high fantasy aspect and allow people to connect with the characters and the setting, but it's still just a video game. No one is going to say that blowing up real-life elderly clerics is acceptable behavior (unless it's sanctioned by the government and conducted by Navy Seals, but that's kinda different because they're on our side). In a game... well, it is a game. Not a single pixel is permanently harmed. Look, they're all still there, winking as you type or as you fire up the XBox to play something else.

Even if there was such a thing as a right way or a wrong way to play a video game, and even if it were okay to tell people which characters they should like, it's all still a game. I don't remember anybody raising such a stink about including the possibility to join the Dark Side or to become Renegade!Shepherd.

Maybe it would have been better if Hawke had a chance to hand Anders the match. Or maybe it would have been better if Hawke had the option to make Anders undo whatever it was he did, but they arrived too late. Good fuel for fanfic, but the game is already out.

Edit: And I probably shouldn't have typed all that. I was in a hurry and didn't filter for anything that could have possibly caused offense. None was intended! I merely find it curious that people have such a strong dislike of a character who did nothing but advance the plot. Does Loghain get so much grief?

Modifié par berelinde, 06 mai 2013 - 06:36 .

[twilekaoi]

berelinde wrote...

It's a video game. A lot of people insist on applying real-world morality and terminology to a fictional universe, and I suppose it's only fair, since the fictional universe was created to minimize the high fantasy aspect and allow people to connect with the characters and the setting, but it's still just a video game. No one is going to say that blowing up real-life elderly clerics is acceptable behavior (unless it's sanctioned by the government and conducted by Navy Seals, but that's kinda different because they're on our side). In a game... well, it is a game. Not a single pixel is permanently harmed. Look, they're all still there, winking as you type or as you fire up the XBox to play something else.

Yeah, I think the obvious unspoken rule everyone adheres to here, is that it's just a video game. I'm not sure if you're speaking in a patronizing tone-- but implying someone to think a character in a fictitious setting is real are either funny, with all due respect-- daft, or incredibly insulting, lol. I'm a little baffled you would compare a fictitious setting to a real life atrocity. This, in its very form on the internet, is just narrative disscusion. Not a mourning/remembrance memorial. Ever hear the phrase "for the sake of discussion"?

Though I should also comment on how this is a forum about the video games lore, character, gameplay mechanics. If there's one place to speak about such trivial things, it's well, here. Are you honestly surprised at the investment of character discussion going on? It's all for the "sake of discussion". Learning others viewpoints and in turn, enjoying the core experience game more.

If you're offended at the use of term, "terrorist", well, it's just a word. It wouldn't matter if it's used to describe an unfortunate real life circumstance, a revenge-ridden cartoon network hamster character, or in this case, a suppressed mage abomination. The situational actions behind the static word is what makes the difference from real life and fiction.

I also don't recall anyone telling people on what fictitious character he or she should like, or how a game is supposed to be played. What I do see-- my posts included, is their opinions of a fictitious characters morale choices in a, fictitious environment. Every one of these posts are subjective, mine included. I have not condemened anyone from liking fictitious (just in case anyone forgets he isn't real) Anders, hell, I like him myself. Fictitious-ly speaking.

Back on point-- the whole premise of Bioware games is the ability to make moral choices. Yes, in a fictitious environment, obviously. The choices are catered to mimic real life circumstance, so I see no reason why players should not take part in a narrative discussion regarding any decisions they see in game with other like-minded folk.

Edit: Just saw your edit and I took the offense, sorry! Though if there were any animosity in my post above, it was just a response to your own non-intended offense. But for the sake of consistency I'll leave everything unedited.

Edit 2: I wouldn't call Anders advancing the plot, more like destabilizing the society between Mages, Templars and innocent civilians of Thedas. Perhaps the stalling of a true peace, a "compromise". Just a waste of lives on all sides on something so abrupt and selfish. The correct way would've been Anders/Wynn Awakening principles, where open war with the Templars would be bad for all parties involved. And this is coming from someone whose Warden supported the uprising of all Circles, until Anders and Wynn put me in my place. Whose to say a non-terrorist Anders wouldn't have advanced a "better" story? That's a thinker! (all my opinion)

Modifié par twilekaoi, 06 mai 2013 - 07:43 .

[Melca36]

[Melca36]

twilekaoi wrote...

Renmiri1 wrote...

Are you telling me Tevinter Archmages DIDN'T call Andraste and her merry band "terrorists" ? Orlesians didn't call  Marric and his band "terrorists" ? 

Not comparable since the situations you provided are entirely different from each other. Terrorism is a politically motivated, premeditated violence made against noncombatants to influence an audience. This is exactly what Anders did.

The Orlesians who occupied Ferelden were usurpers; (in a monarch setting) one who takes something not rightfully theirs by force or by illegal means. Prince Maric, whose mother is called "the Rebel Queen" by Gaidner himself, was murdered by Ferelden nobles looking to please the Orlesian king so that he wouldn't take away their land. Joined by Loghain, a farmer boy whose mother was raped and killed by Orlesian Chevaliers. They are rebels, not terrorists.

A rebel is someone who rises up against a ruler or government in armed resistance. This cannot be compared to terrorism, in that they're just taking back what's rightfully theirs: Ferelden freedom and dethroning an Orlesian usurper (who murdered, raped, killed for fun) in Ferelden land. Not once in The Stolen Throne did Maric or Loghain kill an innocent to sway an audience to their cause. That's right, Loghain.

That same argument can be said for Andraste and Maferath. The Tevinters were going all around Thedas taking people from villages by force and making them into slaves/killing them in blood magic rituals. Andraste, one of those very slaves. I should also mention that the Tevinters ruled their own citizens under the brutal hand of the magisters. In retaliation, the exalted march was conceived, against the Tevinter magisters, not the innocent populace. In fact, just the opposite: according to codex entries, Andraste was marching to free "the people of the Imperium". That, is not a terrorist.

Blowing up a few innocent priests (some who probably sympathized with the mages, oh the irony), the Grand Cleric, lying to your lover/friends and willing to sacrifice an entire circle via Annulment for his "Justice"? Oh, Anders deserves the hate. He even said so himself. What's disturbing about all this is that Anders even compares himself to Andraste. He absolutely cannot be compared to Andraste OR Maric. No, he is comparable to Sister Petrice or the Arishok(note: not all Qunari would have acted the same way). Terrorists.

His love for cats is admirable, he was caring as a healer, even I can see that. But that was almost a decade ago. This isn't the same Anders from Awakening (total 180), Act 1 and 2. With Awakening in mind, he is a renegade terrorist (companion armor upgrade); "a person who deserts and betrays an organization, or set of principles".

I don't compare real life events to a game.

I also remembered the ambient dialogue.....

Alain was sexually abused.  Is that okay?   Is it okay for the tranquil merchants to get beaten too?
Why is it wrong for mages to not even be able to write letters to their family???

So I really do not care what happened to the Chantry because I saw too much inaction from them.
There were freaking sisters soliciting money from the poor in Lowtown.

The place was a lifeless and deserted.  I had more feelings to the refugee children in Darktown. Had the developers designed the Chantry better and showed more people and showed them actually helping my feelings would likely be different.

[berelinde]

 In my opinion, the entire point of Act 3 was the events that led to the destabilization of Thedas, so one might say that was advancing the plot. Again, this is just my opinion, but Act 3, and one might argue much of the rest of the game, was to set the stage for things to come. The next game. So I see the big boom as more of an unavoidable plot device to set up a consistent worldstate for the next installment, where no matter what choices you made, the world would be a mess. Anders's fault? Well, yes, I suppose, but somebody had to do it. But then again, a lot of what I like about Anders has to do with the desperation that drove him to that last step. What pushes somebody to that breaking point? You get a lot of time to watch the slow-moving trainwreck of Anders's decline. It's sad and poignant to note that even in Act 2, he still has hope that Elthina will reign in Meredith, her direct report, and convince her to stop the illegal torture and abuse that is driving the mages to desperation.

Granted, this is a very "meta" way of looking at it. Sorry, but it's very rare that I can read a book or play a game and not look for the strings that tie everything together. When I play, I tend to make mental note of anything that might be important later and then, when the book or game is over, I like to reverse-engineer it and figure out "OK, that character went off the rails there, and this sentence to that person precipitated the crisis there." Not the best way to enjoy immersive gameplay, but that's the way my brain is wired and there isn't much I can do about it.

I like the fact that it was Anders - snarky, sarcastic, "good-natured" Awakening Anders - that underwent the transformation. There are people in this thread who will want to roast me for this, but the point I take home from that is that it could have been anyone. Throw people into an impossible situation, add stress, and people will behave in shocking ways. It makes me wonder if I really knew Anders at all... and it makes me wonder what changes other recurring characters will undergo. Do I like it that friendly, flirty Anders was psychologically devastated? Of course not, but I do like the idea that no character is safe from the writers' tear-guzzling whimsy. Except Leliana, who seems to be some kind of golden child. <_<

Another factor is the moral ambiguity of the choices. With no clear-cut "right choice" or "wrong choice," players seem to have a tendency to equate "right choice" with "my choice," which makes it sound as if somebody else's choice is "wrong" by default. When good and evil are obvious (Dark Side, Renegade), players can say "Yes! Tremble at my dark power!" and everybody laughs. When the both choices are ambiguous, it gets messy.
Sorry if I sounded patronizing. My "forum voice" is probably not the friendliest one out there.

Edit: The forum ate my formatting!

Modifié par berelinde, 06 mai 2013 - 10:08 .