47 réponses à ce sujet

[HarlequinKing]

 There seem to be a lot of folks out here who insist players who chose the other side at the end of the game are "wrong" (i.e. morally bankrupt). I have two thoughts on this:

1.) It's probably a good testament to the writers, since people are actually feeling strongly one way or another. Noticed a few posters who seem to be fanatical mage sympathizers taking this a little too seriously (not a criticism; just saying).

2.) That being said, isn't this missing the point of the story? Seems to me, from a writer's point of view, that the intention was to make your choice between the mages or the templars a "lesser of two evils", much of which is up to simply your personal preference. The other major factor would be based on what Bethany or Carver is doing. In this way, it's a lot like the game "The Witcher". If you haven't played it, it's also an RPG in a dark fantasy setting. You can choose between two factions: the Scoia'tael and the Order of the Flaming Rose (or be neutral to the bitter end). The Scoia'tael is a band of elven freedom fighters, but they're also clearly terrorists. The Order is an association of human knights, many of whom are religious fanatics, led by a madman. But the one knight you work with, Siegfried, is a pretty nice guy. Sound familiar, huh? Anyway, that game was also about picking the lesser of two evils. I ended up going with the Order, but only because I was good friends with that NPC... not on a pretext of holding the moral high ground. Back to DA2, I really think both factions, or neither, are quite justifiable.

[VettoRyouzou]

Frankly I've never viewed as "lesser evils" it just the soul fact both side can do great good and great evil and while they hate one another in the end the truly need one another, Templar need to be able to take care of mage who do walk the dark path, and Mages need a home to learn and study so they can avoid the dark path, it just how it all gone down to make this happen that flawed.

[TJPags]

What about those of us who really didn't care about what happened?

Edit - I made my choice, in the end, for one reason - I have to if I want to finish the game.

I chose to help the mages not because I cared about them, or because I hated Templars - I actually was planning to support the Templars if I had to, what with all the insane blood mages running amok - but because Anulling the Circle when Anders, who was NOT part of the Circle, is the one who set the bomb off, while not even discussing punishing him, bothered me.

Modifié par TJPags, 14 mars 2011 - 12:33 .

[Kemor]

Think about it this way:
What's the worst thing you EVER saw a templar do?
What's the worst thing you EVER saw a mage do?

It's not a question of moral choice, belief or anything like that. It's pure logic: Templars CANNOT screw things up as bad as Mages can, end of discussion.

[VettoRyouzou]

Kemor wrote...

Think about it this way:
What's the worst thing you EVER saw a templar do?
What's the worst thing you EVER saw a mage do?

It's not a question of moral choice, belief or anything like that. It's pure logic: Templars CANNOT screw things up as bad as Mages can, end of discussion.

Unless a templar was the reason the mage was put there in the first place.

Funny thing about monsters, they don't make them selves, some one else has to make it.

[Fishy]

My choice was the templar.But i picked the mage because of Bethany/Merril/Anders and because the Knight-Commander was frigging crazy and just wanted to kill everyone (genocide)

[HarlequinKing]

TJPags wrote...

What about those of us who really didn't care about what happened?

Haha, that's kinda related to the topic. If you would've preferred to just go back to Ferelden, or sit at home and wait it out, then isn't your choice of mages/templars just one of personal preference for the sake of finishing the game?

[TJPags]

HarlequinKing wrote...

TJPags wrote...

What about those of us who really didn't care about what happened?

Haha, that's kinda related to the topic. If you would've preferred to just go back to Ferelden, or sit at home and wait it out, then isn't your choice of mages/templars just one of personal preference for the sake of finishing the game?

Very much so.  As someone somewhere else said, I very much wanted to do Cartman:  "Screw you guys, I'm going home".

Failing that option, as I said in my edit, I chose the mages because Anulling the Circle over what Anders did was wrong, IMO.  And since I had to pick someone, well, there ya go.

[Agorme]

Even if mages are far more dangerous if they screw up.
They are also capable of far greater things if they dont...
Performing mass murder on all the mages , because somme of them turned "evil" or something doesnt realy seem just.

How comme i can kill all the abominations and leave all the innocent mages alive but the templars cant?

Modifié par Agorme, 14 mars 2011 - 12:43 .

[HarlequinKing]

TJPags wrote...

Failing that option, as I said in my edit, I chose the mages because Anulling the Circle over what Anders did was wrong, IMO.  And since I had to pick someone, well, there ya go.

I never thought about that (how Anders wasn't even part of the Circle, anyway) until you mentioned it. I guess that was what Sebastian was trying to say: "why are we debating the RIght of Annulment when the man responsible is right here?", or something to that effect.


I had to execute him, even though I sided with the Mages the first time around. If I didn't kill him, my Warden would've gotten off the throne to finish the job himself. No one betrays the Wardens.

[VettoRyouzou]

Agorme wrote...

Even if mages are far more dangerous if they screw up.
They are alos capable of far greater things if they dont...
Performing mass murder on all the mages , because somme of them turned "evil" or something doesnt realy seem just.

How comme i can kill all the abominations and leave all the innocent mages alive but the templars cant?

It the same logic of why people think mages are these unstoppable forces yet magically are kept in check by a group of people who drink Lyrium.

[HarlequinKing]

Agorme wrote...

How comme i can kill all the abominations and leave all the innocent mages alive but the templars cant?

Ironically, there's a scene where you can choose to spare some mages, and Cullen agrees with you, if you fight for the templars. You can't do this while fighting for the mages. And even fighting for the mages, it seemed like you spend more time fighting your own side, who've turned into abominations, than fighting templars!

(I believe this is more of a game design oversight/laziness, though, not intentional.)

[Kemor]

VettoRyouzou wrote...

Funny thing about monsters, they don't make them selves, some one else has to make it.

Nice way to try and find a excuse as to why some guy cut up women for years then Hawk's mom and brought the pieces back to life...Or kill his own wife, or hunt down her brothers.

Nothing can ever make anyone monster, but oneself. It's ALWAYS a choice, no matter what happens. But that's just normal humans.

The problem with mages is that when things go wrong, things go REALLY wrong.

[Dave of Canada]

I don't think the other side is wrong, I just find some of the arguments they use as... odd.

Like those that say Anders was completely logical and rational in what he did because he has good intentions.

[NKKKK]

Ultimately though Mages are in the wrong, nice debate though

[Agorme]

My point is i can see why someone would choose either side.

What bothered me the most with siding with the templars is that most of them kill first and dont take the time to see if one is compromised or not.
It kinda felt like i was doing their freaking job!

[TJPags]

HarlequinKing wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Failing that option, as I said in my edit, I chose the mages because Anulling the Circle over what Anders did was wrong, IMO.  And since I had to pick someone, well, there ya go.

I never thought about that (how Anders wasn't even part of the Circle, anyway) until you mentioned it. I guess that was what Sebastian was trying to say: "why are we debating the RIght of Annulment when the man responsible is right here?", or something to that effect.


I had to execute him, even though I sided with the Mages the first time around. If I didn't kill him, my Warden would've gotten off the throne to finish the job himself. No one betrays the Wardens.

Oh, I killed him.  Would have preferred a more gruesome death.  But oh well.

[VettoRyouzou]

Kemor wrote...

VettoRyouzou wrote...

Funny thing about monsters, they don't make them selves, some one else has to make it.

Nice way to try and find a excuse as to why some guy cut up women for years then Hawk's mom and brought the pieces back to life...Or kill his own wife, or hunt down her brothers.

Nothing can ever make anyone monster, but oneself. It's ALWAYS a choice, no matter what happens. But that's just normal humans.

The problem with mages is that when things go wrong, things go REALLY wrong.

And as I pointed out they have a bane which are templar who are able to kill them but just like the power of a mage  can go to a man head so can the power of being stronger then a mage go to a man head.

So again your point is moot.

[Sammyjb]

I liked this choice as it was the lesser of two evils. That being said, they set it up to be more people choosing the mages, methinks.

[Deztyn]

I don't think there is a "lesser of two evils" just two evils neither of which you're allowed to compromise with (Goddamnit, Anders) and a lot of innocent people caught in the middle no matter which side you pick.

If the game didn't force a choice, I'd have just sat around let them kill each other.
Edit:

Dave of Canada wrote...

I don't think the other side is wrong, I just find some of the arguments they use as... odd.

Like those that say Anders was completely logical and rational in what he did because he has good intentions.

This.

Anders himself says that he can't tell the difference between Justice and Vengeance anymore. Which makes those arguments even more odd. If the crazy zealot acknowledges he's a crazy zealot that should tell you something.

Modifié par Deztyn, 14 mars 2011 - 12:56 .

[Raltar]

Both choices are wrong.

[MJF JD]

i couldnt allow the annulment even if i didnt fully agree with the mages. Unfortunately that led to every circle in thedas starting a revolution.

[Kemor]

VettoRyouzou wrote...
And as I pointed out they have a bane which are templar who are able to kill them but just like the power of a mage  can go to a man head so can the power of being stronger then a mage go to a man head.

So again your point is moot.

I've yet to see any Templar kill random innocent passerby...
And any Templar going zealot so far only did so against mages, and were proven right nearly at every turn in DA2 because of mages becoming complete crazies, even the first enchanter.

I mean..I bet Thrax now wished we killed all these mages back in the days...oh, if he was actually alive that is...

[Haristo]

In Fallout : New Vegas, the point of the game is to choose between working for the NCR (New California Republic). a corrupted democracy invading near territories and bringing ''Freedom'' to their peoples, they are douches but kind of help pretty nicely your character. Or you can also choose to work for the Caesar's Legion, Caesar's a son of a b!tch from the Colorado who unified some savage humans clans under his banner to invade and bring his light to the savages. He do not tolerate ''modern technologies''. you can also work for yourself.

it's choosing between the less evil one. same as The Witchers.

But Dragon Age 2 was refreshing on the manner to present it.