54 réponses à ce sujet

[RosaAquafire]

Josef bugman3 wrote...
I do not mind if I am a plaything of fate for the most part, but I want (at the end of the day) to look back and go "I did the best I could". Here... I didn't get that at all.

Well, your mileage may vary, I guess, because this is exactly what I got from this game. What happened at the Circle was a tragedy, and what happened in Thedas after that, even moreso, but my Hawke built a good city on Kirkwall's miserable husk after she was made viscount until she was forced to disappear, and she won the respect of the remaining templars and the people who she saved by putting Meredith down.

[Josef bugman3]

I just hate being at BEST a byronic hero. I hated byron, and his heroes suck worse than he did, and seeing it come into games sadens me a little.

I don't mind being penalised for it I don't mind my hawke being slower, or less lucky, or less wealthy, or less attractive or any of a thousand different things. Heck I don't mind him being hated, but to do no good? And worse, to have the illusion of doing good whilst nothing changes? *said in the voice of the robot devil from futurama* That makes me unhappy.

I want to make an ending where (for the most part) things are looking up in some small way. To make a game of darkness and give no hint of light or of hope? That does not make me want to play it, that makes me want to put it down and do something else.

And I did not get it. I just thought when I got to a certain point that "I am a monster". And worse, I am a monster that thought it was helping. So I stopped, turned off the game and went to play Echo Bazaar. At least there the choices are a bit more fun.

Modifié par Josef bugman3, 12 mars 2011 - 12:00 .

[RosaAquafire]

Welp, again, sucks to be you, I guess. Me, on the other hand? This was the first game I've ever played where I felt I really had to think about my morals and my opinions and my views, and I still haven't come up with a right answer. I've played a million games that make me feel like a big boring hero, or a big boring douche for not being a big boring hero.

It's nice to have ONE where me, the player, feels like a philosopher, instead.

[MrStorm2K]

Ultimately, I can understand not wanting to play a bleak game. That's fine. There are times in my own life where I wouldn't want to play one either. But that's not really a mark on the game's quality as much as it is on its style.

And again, saying you did "no good" and that there's no "hint of light or hope" is exaggerating at best and flat-out inaccurate at worst. It could have gotten far, far darker. And there are a litany of people you help.

[Josef bugman3]

Hence why the title says "the largest problem I HAD with the story". Not "Dragon age 2 story sucks: a tale by Josef bugman"

I want to feel like a hero whilst questioning my views. The Serabaas suicide for instance. I thought about that for a while longer than most, and in the end dcided that it was his right to do so. I don't mind my morals being questioned, but for the most part? My morals weren't being "questioned" so much as "ignored". There was no option in the end for me to succeed at the expense of something I loved, I felt no attachement to anything and in the end all I was was a different flavour of horrible human being. If I had had my way Hawke would have sold everything, tried to help and get people out, shanked anders prior to his terrorist attack and if not of that had worked? Find the biggest heaviest rock I could and attach it to my leg before pushing it into the harbour.

Point out the people I "help" please, I couldn't see them over the pile of corpses I helped create through the "choices".

Modifié par Josef bugman3, 12 mars 2011 - 12:18 .

[MrStorm2K]

Josef bugman3 wrote...

Hence why the title says "the largest problem I HAD with the story". Not "Dragon age 2 story sucks: a tale by Josef bugman"

True enough. My bad.

Point out the people I "help" please, I couldn't see them over the pile of corpses I helped create through the "choices".

The following is (obviously) dependent on your decisions:

All of your companions, your family, a variety of NPCs like Feynriel, Thrask, and the miners, the Qunari, the entire town of Kirkwall (by slaying Meridith), Flemeth, Zevran, Leliana...

I think I've made my point.

[Josef bugman3]

I just don't see it myself.

I am just going to lay the game to one side and do other things for a while. If you guys enjoyed it then all I can say is "awesome" I'm glad that you did, and the game is clearly a labour into which time, effort and love have been poured. I just can't stand how little what you do seems to affect anything, and how nigh on everything seems to bite you in the arse harder than a cloacha devouring hound.

If the choice were between two "goods" that I had to choose between which represented me best, I would have been happy to choose and would have told people why, but here I just felt like a monster whichever side is chosen, just with a different slant on evil.

[Maruset]

I think the important thing here is the lack of choice. Sure, Josef wants a shiny good knight or whatever, but there aren't enough evil options either. Essentially, having to choose between the general choice between moral satisfaction or the highly superior rewards of being a jackass. Take the choice about golems in origins. I know people will be dragged screaming to that anvil, but Golems kick ass, so, golems for me. However, I sacrificed the chance at kickass werewolves to save everyone but Zathrian because it made me happy to do so.

Or one of my favorite examples of choice, in Knights of the Old Republic. Granted, if there's a benefit to this I don't remember it, but poisoning the Kolto supply was pretty much the most evil, impactful decision I've ever been able to make, but I felt something doing that, and it was awesome for a game to evoke regret and evil cackletime at once.

Here, it's more "Hawke was slashing through random folks one day for some reason he forgot about when...*turns page* Oh, I see this happened." Should I be nice or a jerk to these guys? Eh, doesn't matter, either way I'm about to kill them so w/e

[MrStorm2K]

@ Josef Bugman

Fair enough. I hope whatever comes next is more enjoyable for you. Good discussion.

Modifié par MrStorm2K, 12 mars 2011 - 12:43 .

[Josef bugman3]

Indeed, and thank you all for being polite. I know what I was saying is probably rubbing people who did like it the wrong way, but I just felt the need to vent.

[OldMan91]

Josef bugman3 wrote...

Indeed, and thank you all for being polite. I know what I was saying is probably rubbing people who did like it the wrong way, but I just felt the need to vent.

I thought you had a point in your original post. The game offers choices that lead to disaster regardless of your intentions or expectations. The word "realism" is thrown around a lot, and i'm beginning to suspect that people misunderstand meaning of the word. In the words of Iñigo Montoya: "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

[Josef bugman3]

I do feel that people feel that suffering, death and failure being more "real" than more slightly positive emotions is a bad thing. Just because these things occur and are horrible does not make them possess more meaning than a big hug with your dad or working at a soup kitchen.

[DieHigh2012]

I agree with the OP. If I want to be helpless and bear witness to a situation of utterly no hope whatsoever, I'll read Shakespeare or The Iliad.

When I play a game I want to be the great hero that, despite the odds, rights wrongs and saves the helpless. Not some hapless fool that, no matter what he does, only makes things worse.

It doesn't need to be cookie cutter, but does need to show at lest a likeness to being an actual hero. In this game I'm just the well meaning fool that screws up the whole political fabric of Thedas. It's like I took a broken clock and decided it would be a great idea to try and fix it by hitting it repeatedly with a sledgehammer.

The "real" world might not have any such heros, but the "real"world also doesn't have mages, elves, dwarves, qunari, darkspawn, ect...... So I'll be fine with an "unrealistic" hero thank you.

Modifié par DieHigh2012, 12 mars 2011 - 01:19 .

[Josef bugman3]

I think Shakespeare is a good example, its why I would have given an eye tooth to play as Varric in this, morally questionable, hilarious and helps out his friends and family before recounting the tale of one of his friends and the tragedy that unfolded from that.

The reason I mention shakespeare is because Hawke could be played as Hamlet, whyever hamlet does the things he does in his play I would still consider him a monsterous, stupid individual whose every action towards his goal of righteousness leaves only corpses and curtains behind.

Whereas Varric is essentially a more likeable Horatio, and that I could seriously get behind.

Modifié par Josef bugman3, 12 mars 2011 - 01:29 .

[Lumenadducere]

Both sides make some good points. What I'd really like to see is the third option, but at a cost. The problem with the Connor choice in DA:O is that it really has no consequence for taking the weeks-long journey to the Circle and back, which makes little sense given the fact that a pseudo-abomination is terrorizing the town. I think a token dialogue mentioning more guard deaths as they kept Isolde and Teagan protected would have done something to help that. Then a more meaningful choice is presented to the player: do I save Isolde and Connor to help preserve the nobility at Redcliffe and help convince Arl Eamon, but lose the lives of more townspeople while doing so? Or do I sacrifice Isolde or Connor, possibly upsetting Eamon but saving more lives than if I had taken the trip?

What I would have liked to see for DA2 is more scenarios along that line for the main plot. As it is, the main plot does kind of railroad you towards everything going kablooie regardless of what you do. There's no agency there. I can understand setting up a situation where forces are so strong that Kirkwall has to become a mess. I think it's a better portrayal of one lone person trying to stand against the tide, because oftentimes that doesn't work, and it does make for a stronger story. But I really would have liked to see the choices have things work out, only come with a cost, one that's big enough to get the Divine sending Cassandra to figure out what happened. You still have the consequences and the flaws and the portrayal of one person's struggle against something that's uncontrollable, and yet the player's choice still holds lasting impact.

[DieHigh2012]

Josef bugman3 wrote...

I think Shakespeare is a good example, its why I would have given an eye tooth to play as Varric in this, morally questionable, hilarious and helps out his friends and family before recounting the tale of one of his friends and the tragedy that unfolded from that.

The reason I mention shakespeare is because Hawke could be played as Hamlet, whyever hamlet does the things he does in his play I would still consider him a monsterous, stupid individual whose every action towards his goal of righteousness leaves only corpses and curtains behind.

Whereas Varric is essentially a more likeable Horatio, and that I could seriously get behind.

Thats about the feeling I got aswell, and I like your idea about switching the main character to Varic.

Mabey I'm just upset at the grand illusion of choice that's in this game.

[Josef bugman3]

I would quite happily play a game where Varric and Avelaine join up to play politics in Kirkwall. Seriously I would love a game like that, with the constant backsass from both sides just adding to it.

And I agree with you too Lumen, I would like to have had options that could have spared people.

[OriginalTibs]

Vukodlak wrote...

Really I was faced with a lot of choices where I manged to end things peacefully, so your statement and thesis appear to be based on your bad choices. There are certainly a few points where your powerless to do anything but that helps drive the story through tragedy.

Despite the fact that I have not finished, I am playing 5 varient characters and have noticed that subtly different things occur in the story depending on your class and how you work through things.

This implies to me that Vukodlak has a valid point despite all these fatalistic dark reports from various players.

It is a fact that in the world few decisions are somehow partitioned off from the rest of the world. Everything is holistically integral.

The secondary quests similarly form the context of the main plot, and may therefore very well affect the ultimate outcome.

Perhaps it would be best to consider that the road to Gehenna is paved with good intentions.

In terms of literary value, the story already seems remarkably appropriate in this culture, in these times. No matter what we try, a 'better' world seems to be growing vanishingly improbable.

Modifié par OriginalTibs, 12 mars 2011 - 02:44 .

[Edge2177]

Josef bugman3 wrote...

It seems like we are all doing very long essays of what we liked and disliked.

I think what I disliked can be summed up in one sentence: "I had an infinite amount of choices, and all of them end in death".

Not a single time when you tried to do something good or kind did it work out, I can understand that YES on occasion that is a damn good way to make a story have weight, take for instance the death of leandra, THAT was a good quest because it grabbed at the heartstrings and made you feel really invested in the character. The problem is that when
seemingly every choice you make ends in bloodshed and death no matter what you choose? It kind of looses any form of shock or gravity, it simply becomes a feeling of "the game is screwing me over".

Let me be blunt, I like playing as a hero, I like being an occasional knight in sour armour, I like helping people and trying to ensure the good of all. But here? Nothing you do works, I didn't feel like a champion, I felt like an idiot.

Anyway I know this isn't too long, but I just wanted to ask if there will be more third options in the upcoming games? I mean I really LIKE taking a third option that helps everyone, its hard work and heck I wouldn't mind even changing my hawke to being half as powerful and taking on Meredith with a rusty spoony if it meant I could stop Anders from his little stint in the IRA.

I just felt pathetic doing this, and will be a bit more careful with this franchise in the future, I'll wait to see if there is any good ending possible for Thedas. If not, then I still have Old Republic and Mass Effect, but I just find this turn of events a bit saddening.

Only dead person in my 'story' was my brother, Carver, and the elf girl in the 3rd act when you're hunting rogue mages. Killed the head elf too, but that was a good death. And mom, of course, but again I did get to stay with her in the end. Develops the character.

Modifié par Edge2177, 12 mars 2011 - 02:45 .

[magicwins]

Completely agree OP. This is my primary problem with the game. I enjoy making a difference. Ideally, I would enjoy saving the world and righting all the wrongs, but in the very least I would like to champion one side of a cause where there is no clear right or wrong and feel good about my decisions. DA2 does not even offer that.

If I side with the Mages, Orsino turns into the Harvester before my eyes. If I side with the Templars, I learn that the woman whose cause I am championing is insane. Oh, and neither choice has a real effect on the ending. World is screwed, templars and mages are at war. GG. That's just ridiculous. At least let me sway the balance of power either way.

Additional elements that frustrate me: Being unable to kill Petrice when you first meet her, Not pursuing Isabela, Being unable to stop my siblings' death/absence no matter what, as well as my mother's death....

No game has ever turned me into such a b**ch in my second playthrough. I bark at everyone, because I know exactly how they're going to screw me over, what their true intentions are, and how I can do absolutely nothing about it.

Why is it not possible to have branching outcomes? Maybe your choices have an overall end that is identical, but there are a number of major elements along the way that are different. You could maintain a storyline without obliterating the player's sense of choice.

I guess this is just another example of a good idea badly implemented. Or maybe they wanted to screw us all over repeatedly and see how we like it. To summarize, I hate it.

[Darth Obvious]

Yeah, the ending was extremely weak.

I thought they should have switched the 2nd and 3rd Acts... i.e. the not-so-epic local conflict between the Templars and Mages should have been in the middle (and then you could have one or the other group as your allies later), and a massive invasion by the Qunari should have been at the end.

Weird. Really feel like Bioware dropped the ball on this one (they essentially did the same thing in ME2... the overall plot just sort of fell short, despite the great characters/interactions/small plots/etc.).

[Der Kirk]

The not-so-epic conflict between the templars and mages causes mass rebellions in circles all over thedas. These rebellions plunge the world into utter chaos. The qunari don't seem like such a big deal when compared to utter chaos.

[Darth Obvious]

Der Kirk wrote...

The not-so-epic conflict between the templars and mages causes mass rebellions in circles all over thedas. These rebellions plunge the world into utter chaos. The qunari don't seem like such a big deal when compared to utter chaos.

So with that logic, maybe we don't need the game at all, if we can't actually SEE the chaos of which you speak. I could read about that on a webpage and it would be equally un-exciting.

[Der Kirk]

The chaos is the reason behind the urgency of the ending scene with Cassandra, and is the entire cause of Varric telling the story which you just played through. I consider those at least in game references to its existence.

Modifié par Der Kirk, 12 mars 2011 - 04:12 .

[Cuthlan]

Josef bugman3 wrote...

It seems like we are all doing very long essays of what we liked and disliked.

I think what I disliked can be summed up in one sentence: "I had an infinite amount of choices, and all of them end in death".

Not a single time when you tried to do something good or kind did it work out, I can understand that YES on occasion that is a damn good way to make a story have weight, take for instance the death of leandra, THAT was a good quest because it grabbed at the heartstrings and made you feel really invested in the character. The problem is that when
seemingly every choice you make ends in bloodshed and death no matter what you choose? It kind of looses any form of shock or gravity, it simply becomes a feeling of "the game is screwing me over".

Let me be blunt, I like playing as a hero, I like being an occasional knight in sour armour, I like helping people and trying to ensure the good of all. But here? Nothing you do works, I didn't feel like a champion, I felt like an idiot.

Anyway I know this isn't too long, but I just wanted to ask if there will be more third options in the upcoming games? I mean I really LIKE taking a third option that helps everyone, its hard work and heck I wouldn't mind even changing my hawke to being half as powerful and taking on Meredith with a rusty spoony if it meant I could stop Anders from his little stint in the IRA.

I just felt pathetic doing this, and will be a bit more careful with this franchise in the future, I'll wait to see if there is any good ending possible for Thedas. If not, then I still have Old Republic and Mass Effect, but I just find this turn of events a bit saddening.

I usually persue the options you are looking for in games. Try to find the ultimate good choice... the way to please everyone and save the day.

I set out in DA2 to play this sort of character. I took Bethanny under my wing and never let her leave my side, planning to protect her at all costs. Then it was all destroyed when I was blind-sided by her dying to the taint in the deep roads. I was so emotionally shocked and mad that I turned off the game and quit playing it for the night, trying to decide how I was going to change my choices when I started over because I hated this character now.

But in the morning I decided to stick it out and just finish the game. It didn't take me long before I started to enjoy myself again, and I decided to chalk it up as a second major tragedy in Hawke's life that would define who he was, vowing to still do the best I could. Then MamaHawke was murdered and died in his arms. This is Hawke, shattered again.

Continue on and you've got his love interest doing the wrong thing for the right reason and having to help her kill her entire clan. Partnering with a good-hearted mage to try to make a difference for mages for love of his dead sister just to be stabbed in the back and tricked into helping something terrible happening.

But the more this stuff happened, the more it felt like it fit. The story of my good-guy Hawke was a story of good intentions and tragedy at every turn. A man who did the best he could but couldn't save the day. His entire family died in situations he felt he created or could have prevented and the city he loved burned because of things he unknowingly helped to happen.

Good-guy Hawke's story is dark indeed. But it felt right at the end, to me. Anyone can play the hero when everything always ends up sunshine and daisies, but only a man with a will of iron could go through all of that tragedy and still keep trying to be a good person. And I think that is what really made DA2's story great for me.

Modifié par Cuthlan, 12 mars 2011 - 04:17 .