Long read...
So I have been considering what is really bothering me with Dragon Age 2, I loved DA:O but DA2 was lacking that something. There are many things I consider inferior to the first but the major gripe I have with DA2 is the roleplay element or lack of roleplay.
Sure I became a Champion, a Champion of a graveyard. Then I vanish.
Characters interact with Hawke on a level like he is well known by them and I don't really know him as well as some NPC's do. Yet I am meant to be him?
The story is set it seems, I am mearly a pawn. I felt like in DA:O that if my Warden did not complete his mission of uniting Fereldan then the consequences would be very dire. In DA2 you are simply just part of events you can not control, regardless of what you try to roleplay your character as.
If the game had ended with defeating the Arishok I think I would have been more satisfied then having to continue with the 3rd act. The lead up from Act 1 to 2 builds up the tension with the Qunari and mystery of why they are there. Finally understanding at the end of Act 2 when you learn more about the relic and the Quanri's goals it was really wrapping up the game for me.
The idol/deeproads expedition has purpose also, I am flat broke and my family is living with a deadbeat uncle in a rat infested hovel. It gave me a reason to pick up mercenary tasks and to rebuild my life, also the chance to get back what my uncle lost.
As I was playing I even felt the 2nd Act would be the end as it felt like I was already the Champion by finally resolving the problem of the Qunari. In the 3rd act, especially by the end after supporting the mages and my choice of who I supported meant absolutely nothing. Both factions go postal and kill anyone and everyone, even the First Enchater turns on me. The end fights were ridiculous, statues coming to life.... <head desk>, Flesh Golem First Enchanter another...<head desk>. I enjoyed Mass Effect 2's terminator fight more as it was plausable and fit into the theme of both games, even if I did laugh when I saw T-1000 up there.
When it got all crazy at the end I wanted to turn to Isabella whom I chose as my LI and say "Hey, remember that sailing the seas together idea? Yea lets get the hell outta here, this place is crazier then when the Darkspawn attacked Fereldan"
With DA:O you had a reason to fight for victory. I enjoyed having the lost bastard child of Maric on the journey with me. Made making him king very enjoyable as he was now a worldly and experienced ruler. It made me want to achieve something.
I especially enjoyed the human noble origin as it fit very well into the story of the two wardens who are seeking vengence and trying to save Ferelden. The story seemed so much deeper and I really wanted to try out many other path's through the game. It felt like I was allowed to become the character, even if I was a mute.
In DA2 I lose my entire reason for building a new life in Kirkwall, my family. Carver dies early, Bethany in the deep roads and mother to Quintin(SP?). I am surprised Hawke doesn't have a breakdown and end up in the brothel drinking with his uncle.
There is no one in Kirkwall be it mages or templars that I feel the need to get rid of, why must I meddle in affairs that really do not effect me anymore as my sister was the only reason to fight templars. The problem is very small in comparison, even if it does effect the world afterwards. I tried very hard to roleplay a opportunist, in it for the money, rogue. The game constantly pigeonholed me into someone that should care about this conflict, even though I really didn't. There was no choice, no roleplay.
I felt that my responses were already chosen for me, it was just a matter of picking how I wanted to respond. Good/Snarky/A-hole made no difference other than the words that came through Hawkes mouth(Enjoyed the vioce acting by the way). After playing a second game my fears have been confirmed, not much changes regardless. There might be a comment if who you are talking to thinks its funny/offensive. In the end the script takes over and the same response is said most of the time.
In DA:O I really felt that I could be a Warden who's sole focus was eradicating darkspawn with no care for anything else, or a noble warrior who fought for justice and good, I could be a mage who hated the circle/chantry/templars(similar to Anders). Although these were still minimal in the bigger scale of the story, where the focus was always to defeat an old god and defeat the blight. I felt that I could chose the way my character developed and the people around him were affected.
Some examples are Annuling the Circle or Saving the mages, ultimately the tower is saved but I can chose whom I think is the better choice and which path is right.
Defiling the Ashes or not was another big one.
Werewolves/Elves.
Abandoning Redcliff because I have better things to do was a great choice.
Helping the dwarves, especially since there is no best choice. Both have pros/cons.
What this done is gave the game great replayability and I did play through DA:O many times whilst roleplaying my character the way I wanted. In DA2 I do not get to roleplay, unless I want to be the popular Champion of Kirkwall which is the only real roleplaying choice for the story.
The canon story is set, you must become the Champion and start a rebellion. Even if you don't know it yet. This is by far the laziest RPG effort Bioware has done in a very long time. Bioware is capable of excellent games, I have played most.
The Mass Effect trilogy has evolved from 1 to 2 very well(very excited about part 3 when it comes), it seems though that DA2 is a giant leap back in story telling from DA:O. Which was not perfect, but told a much deeper compelling story and one which I felt my actions meant something.
It was really the Baldurs Gate type of game I was looking for, Sarevok and Jon Irenicus were amazing villains and so deep. Loghain rates right up there with them also, the Archdemon was very one dimensional but had purpose and a place in the story.
Orsino and Meredith seem so shallow, the Arishok was deeper than they were and he spoke so little in comparison. In the few encounters you can really see his character and how he changes or doesn't change.
There were some great twists in the story and interestingly enough kept me on my toes, but the lack of real choice is the game killer for me as I can really only enjoy the story once, one way. I can not see myself replaying DA2 nearly as much as Mass effect 1/2, DA:O or any of your other titles over the years.
DA2 is mearly an interactive novel, with nice graphics. There is no roleplaying, unless you follow the lead. This is not to say the story was bad, the politics is very interesting, I just wish I could make a difference. I wish I knew my own character whom I am supposed to be roleplaying as.
Really feel like Bioware forgot what roleplaying games are about, or you just didn't care.
What has happened to Roleplaying?
Débuté par
Seblin
, mars 15 2011 02:15
Retour en haut
#2
Posté 15 mars 2011 - 02:18
kjdhgfiliuhwe
-
- Members
- 1 106 messages
This argument about choice never fails to amaze me. There is never real choice in a video game. By its very nature it is pre-scripted. It's a completely senseless argument that rages on and on after every game is released.
#3
Posté 15 mars 2011 - 02:21
Maria Caliban
-
- Members
- 26 094 messages
Seblin wrote...
The story is set it seems, I am mearly a pawn. I felt like in DA:O that if my Warden did not complete his mission of uniting Fereldan then the consequences would be very dire. In DA2 you are simply just part of events you can not control, regardless of what you try to roleplay your character as.
The story of Dragon Age II is set just like every other BioWare game. In DA II, failure is the only option. In DA:O, winning is the only option.
#4
Posté 15 mars 2011 - 02:23
Merci357
-
- Members
- 1 321 messages
Seblin wrote...
The canon story is set, you must become the Champion and start a rebellion. Even if you don't know it yet. This is by far the laziest RPG effort Bioware has done in a very long time. Bioware is capable of excellent games, I have played most.
You might not like the premise, and that's more then fair. But it's not that different to, you must become a Grey Warden and defeat the Archdemon, isn't it?
#5
Posté 15 mars 2011 - 02:26
JakePT
-
- Members
- 477 messages
I didn't really feel this way, which is odd, since I should have. After three years it really didn't seem like the character did anything on his own, independent of my input. The only exception being the first jump where he's apparently worked for some scumbags for a year and met some people. After that it seems like I jump in the only 3 times he made any kind of decisions in 7 years.Seblin wrote...
Sure I became a Champion, a Champion of a graveyard. Then I vanish.
Characters interact with Hawke on a level like he is well known by them and I don't really know him as well as some NPC's do. Yet I am meant to be him?
Modifié par JakePT, 15 mars 2011 - 02:28 .
#6
Posté 15 mars 2011 - 02:35
Arppis
-
- Members
- 12 750 messages
Maybe Hawke was duty-bound? But to be honest, Ferelden didn't have much to offer to him anymore. His home and family was gone. There was no reason to go back and Kirkwall was the only home he had left. He still had his friends there. And what if things would go as badly if he would return to Ferelden? Or even when he would go to the sea like you said?
#7
Posté 15 mars 2011 - 02:38
AlexXIV
-
- Members
- 10 670 messages
Well only if you consider it fail that you can't stop Anders.I rather think that winning or losing is predetermined based on your views. You can't change what happens, but you can consider it a victory of sorts or a defeat.Maria Caliban wrote...
Seblin wrote...
The story is set it seems, I am mearly a pawn. I felt like in DA:O that if my Warden did not complete his mission of uniting Fereldan then the consequences would be very dire. In DA2 you are simply just part of events you can not control, regardless of what you try to roleplay your character as.
The story of Dragon Age II is set just like every other BioWare game. In DA II, failure is the only option. In DA:O, winning is the only option.
Modifié par AlexXIV, 15 mars 2011 - 02:39 .
#8
Posté 15 mars 2011 - 02:49
azarhal
-
- Members
- 4 458 messages
Maria Caliban wrote...
Seblin wrote...
The story is set it seems, I am mearly a pawn. I felt like in DA:O that if my Warden did not complete his mission of uniting Fereldan then the consequences would be very dire. In DA2 you are simply just part of events you can not control, regardless of what you try to roleplay your character as.
The story of Dragon Age II is set just like every other BioWare game. In DA II, failure is the only option. In DA:O, winning is the only option.
This. Although, I wouldn't call it failure...because nobody allowed Hawke to stop the fight. People asking him to take a side and in the end human nature won.
I also had an easier time role playing a sarcastic mage in DA2, then in DA:O.
#9
Posté 15 mars 2011 - 02:58
Layn
-
- Members
- 590 messages
the better way to put it is. DA:O was a lot better at giving the illusion of choice and freedom, while DA2 openly flaunts with its linearity. i don't mind that a lot of things happen inevitably, sometimes stuff happens and theres nothing you can do. but i didn't like how stuck i was with the character bioware decided to createkjdhgfiliuhwe wrote...
This argument about choice never fails to amaze me. There is never real choice in a video game. By its very nature it is pre-scripted. It's a completely senseless argument that rages on and on after every game is released.
#10
Posté 15 mars 2011 - 03:02
Malja
-
- Members
- 1 737 messages
Crrash wrote...
the better way to put it is. DA:O was a lot better at giving the illusion of choice and freedom, while DA2 openly flaunts with its linearity.kjdhgfiliuhwe wrote...
This argument about choice never fails to amaze me. There is never real choice in a video game. By its very nature it is pre-scripted. It's a completely senseless argument that rages on and on after every game is released.
This.
#11
Posté 15 mars 2011 - 03:04
kjdhgfiliuhwe
-
- Members
- 1 106 messages
So, people get upset they can't pretend to have choice. 
I must be a weirdo thinking how silly that sounds.
I must be a weirdo thinking how silly that sounds.
#12
Posté 15 mars 2011 - 03:06
Parrk
-
- Members
- 333 messages
What strikes me as odd about this thread is that the op complains that this is a mediocre Bioware effort. That complaint in itself is not interesting because many others have made it. What makes this interesting is that the op writes a well-reasoned argument with valid points. He certainly seems capable of having appreciated the tremendous depth of this game, but for whatever reason, simply has not.
This tale puts DA:O to shame. I can see where some may be upset because there is not big bad dragon whose death symbolizes the clear victory over the forces of evil. In DA2 the forces of evil are human, and they are everywhere. There will never be consensus on which side is "good" because different people attribute varying levels of important to any numbers of ideals.
They are all there though, and none of them are cast in bland black and white. Rather than a story of killing a dragon and saving the world from evil, this is a story of accepting responsibility and saving the world from itself.
I almost wish that the idol wasn't in the game. Clearly Meredith was a different person before it. She was still a hard-a** and still practiced a fundamentalism that ran contrary to my character's. I am a die-hard mage supporter and there were moments in that story where I wanted to hug her.
If you simply do not care about the finer points of the struggles inherent of the human condition, or have a difficult time getting excited by the nuanced battle between right-wrong and wrong-right, then perhaps this game is boring.
Immersive RPG is what Bio does best, and imho, this is their greatest offering to date. This game represents a maturation of the genre. You don't always have to "omg!stop-the-collectors" or "we gotta keel teh arch-demon!!!111wunwunwun". in order to feel a part of something larger than self.
Some have commented "The writing is good but the game is not (paraphrase)" whereas it seems to me that this game sets out to prove that in a visually-dominated entertainment medium, you actually can bring writing to the forefront and succeed exquisitely.
The nuanced meaning of the idol is never explicitly stated, but clearly it held some part of something quite inherently evil. I found it striking that Bertrand said the idol sang to him. this "singing" is also the method of control used by archdemons to control darkspawn. What does that tell us about this type of being's ability to corrupt humans in a strictly non-physical way? This idol (or more specifically, whatever its physical representation is posessed by), has come closer to bringing about the destruction of humanity than the 5th archdemon ever came....many times over.
the champion actually faces a more threatening foe than the hero of fereldan. How is that no "big" enough for some people?
Brilliant accomplishments in entertainment are not always appreciated initially, or ever. I've been told by more than a couple people that they though Reservoir Dogs was "stupid and boring". I can never accept that and rather than say "no U", I just kinda feel a touch of pity for those who are unable to see as I do. I suspect this game will be another example of such.
This tale puts DA:O to shame. I can see where some may be upset because there is not big bad dragon whose death symbolizes the clear victory over the forces of evil. In DA2 the forces of evil are human, and they are everywhere. There will never be consensus on which side is "good" because different people attribute varying levels of important to any numbers of ideals.
They are all there though, and none of them are cast in bland black and white. Rather than a story of killing a dragon and saving the world from evil, this is a story of accepting responsibility and saving the world from itself.
I almost wish that the idol wasn't in the game. Clearly Meredith was a different person before it. She was still a hard-a** and still practiced a fundamentalism that ran contrary to my character's. I am a die-hard mage supporter and there were moments in that story where I wanted to hug her.
If you simply do not care about the finer points of the struggles inherent of the human condition, or have a difficult time getting excited by the nuanced battle between right-wrong and wrong-right, then perhaps this game is boring.
Immersive RPG is what Bio does best, and imho, this is their greatest offering to date. This game represents a maturation of the genre. You don't always have to "omg!stop-the-collectors" or "we gotta keel teh arch-demon!!!111wunwunwun". in order to feel a part of something larger than self.
Some have commented "The writing is good but the game is not (paraphrase)" whereas it seems to me that this game sets out to prove that in a visually-dominated entertainment medium, you actually can bring writing to the forefront and succeed exquisitely.
The nuanced meaning of the idol is never explicitly stated, but clearly it held some part of something quite inherently evil. I found it striking that Bertrand said the idol sang to him. this "singing" is also the method of control used by archdemons to control darkspawn. What does that tell us about this type of being's ability to corrupt humans in a strictly non-physical way? This idol (or more specifically, whatever its physical representation is posessed by), has come closer to bringing about the destruction of humanity than the 5th archdemon ever came....many times over.
the champion actually faces a more threatening foe than the hero of fereldan. How is that no "big" enough for some people?
Brilliant accomplishments in entertainment are not always appreciated initially, or ever. I've been told by more than a couple people that they though Reservoir Dogs was "stupid and boring". I can never accept that and rather than say "no U", I just kinda feel a touch of pity for those who are unable to see as I do. I suspect this game will be another example of such.
#13
Posté 15 mars 2011 - 03:30
AbsolutGrndZer0
-
- Members
- 1 578 messages
Again I see people thinking a video game can have choice like a tabletop roleplaying game. In a video game you can have 2 scripted options or you can have 10... still, you are limited to what is programmed into the game. It's not like a tabletop roleplaying game where a real human is interpreting what you want to do and acting accordingly.
On other threads I've seen people mad because they can't choose to let blood mages and abominations live... Excuse me? What, you are complaining because they won't let you be evil? The game is meant for you to be a hero, not evil. If you want the option to be a bloodthirsty murderer and oppress the world, go play the Fable series. The DA series is about HEROES.
On other threads I've seen people mad because they can't choose to let blood mages and abominations live... Excuse me? What, you are complaining because they won't let you be evil? The game is meant for you to be a hero, not evil. If you want the option to be a bloodthirsty murderer and oppress the world, go play the Fable series. The DA series is about HEROES.
#14
Posté 15 mars 2011 - 03:41
Everwarden
-
- Members
- 1 296 messages
kjdhgfiliuhwe wrote...
This argument about choice never fails to amaze me. There is never real choice in a video game. By its very nature it is pre-scripted. It's a completely senseless argument that rages on and on after every game is released.
Wrong. Choice doesn't necessarily mean "do anything you want", it means having enough options that you can feel free to roleplay the character you want to. In DA2 you don't have any choices at all other than your tone of voice, who you romance, and what side you pick at the end. And it all ends up in the same place, with the same results. Your 'choices' didn't matter or change anything. That was not true in DAO, and I don't remember anyone accusing DAO of being a game without meaningful choices that shape the world around you.
You are thwarted again, Bio-drone.
Modifié par Everwarden, 15 mars 2011 - 03:49 .
#15
Posté 15 mars 2011 - 03:48
Darth Obvious
-
- Members
- 430 messages
Everwarden wrote...
Wrong. Choice doesn't necessarily mean "do anything you want", it means having enough options that you can feel free to roleplay the character you want to. In DA2 you don't have any choices at all other than your tone of voice, who you romance, and what side you pick at the end. And it all ends up in the same place, with the same results. Your 'choices' didn't matter or change anything. That was no true in DAO, and I don't remember anyone accusing DAO of being a game without meaningful choices that shape the world around you.
You are thwarted again, Bio-drone.
Precisely.
#16
Posté 15 mars 2011 - 03:54
Sjofn
-
- Members
- 944 messages
I have definitely heard people complain DA:O wasn't sandboxy enough. This always drives me crazy, because since when are Bioware RPGs ever sandboxy? Generally you can pick what order you want to do stuff in, but there's always an ultimate thing you are working towards. Why DA2's thing is somehow "linear" while some people delude themselves into thinking DA:O's isn't is bizarre.
Bhelen versus Harrowmont, Elves versus Werewolves, Templars versus Mage, ultimately those choices don't matter a whole lot. You'd still get an army to fight the Archdemon. Even who you pick to rule Fereldan doesn't have a huge impact from a general standpoint, all the epilogue cards for that are basically "yeah, that person was pretty OK at it." But all these things have an impact in a "how you feel your story was told" sense, and I most definitely do not feel Dragon Age 2 fails in this regard.
I assume the real problem is a lot of sad stuff happens that you can't stop. There were ways to weasel out of basically every "bad" outcome in DA:O, not so in DA2. Frankly, I like DA2 better for that.
Bhelen versus Harrowmont, Elves versus Werewolves, Templars versus Mage, ultimately those choices don't matter a whole lot. You'd still get an army to fight the Archdemon. Even who you pick to rule Fereldan doesn't have a huge impact from a general standpoint, all the epilogue cards for that are basically "yeah, that person was pretty OK at it." But all these things have an impact in a "how you feel your story was told" sense, and I most definitely do not feel Dragon Age 2 fails in this regard.
I assume the real problem is a lot of sad stuff happens that you can't stop. There were ways to weasel out of basically every "bad" outcome in DA:O, not so in DA2. Frankly, I like DA2 better for that.
#17
Posté 15 mars 2011 - 03:55
LeaveMeAlone9009
-
- Members
- 180 messages
Seriously, who is arguing that DAO DIDNT have choice?
May I remind you the three drastic endings you get to choose in DA2 backstory?
A Dwarf who is rutheless and has Alistair exiled.
A Elf who sacrifices herself, and has Alistair MARRY Anora.
A Human? who I think sleeps with Morrigan and has Alistair on the throne by himself. Not sure.
Those are different, and those arent even all the endings you could get.
May I remind you the three drastic endings you get to choose in DA2 backstory?
A Dwarf who is rutheless and has Alistair exiled.
A Elf who sacrifices herself, and has Alistair MARRY Anora.
A Human? who I think sleeps with Morrigan and has Alistair on the throne by himself. Not sure.
Those are different, and those arent even all the endings you could get.
#18
Posté 15 mars 2011 - 04:30
TyDurden13
-
- Members
- 429 messages
Darth Obvious wrote...
Everwarden wrote...
Wrong. Choice doesn't necessarily mean "do anything you want", it means having enough options that you can feel free to roleplay the character you want to. In DA2 you don't have any choices at all other than your tone of voice, who you romance, and what side you pick at the end. And it all ends up in the same place, with the same results. Your 'choices' didn't matter or change anything. That was no true in DAO, and I don't remember anyone accusing DAO of being a game without meaningful choices that shape the world around you.
Precisely.
Have to say I agree here as well. Yes, the plot was pre-set in DAO, but how it played out and what happened to everyone at the end was very different depending on HOW you accomplished those pre-determined goals. your choices had a lot of meaning.
That said - I will say (and have said in other threads) that while you cannot affect the world in any significant way in DA2, you do affect the fates of your companions. That's something, but I think we should have some agency over what happens at the end of the game as well.
Actually, I think part of the problem here is that the story of DA2 was not finished. It ends right as the most interesting things and the final consequences of your decisions are about to happen.
#19
Posté 15 mars 2011 - 04:43
AnotherAD
-
- Members
- 44 messages
TyDurden13 wrote...
Darth Obvious wrote...
Everwarden wrote...
Wrong. Choice doesn't necessarily mean "do anything you want", it means having enough options that you can feel free to roleplay the character you want to. In DA2 you don't have any choices at all other than your tone of voice, who you romance, and what side you pick at the end. And it all ends up in the same place, with the same results. Your 'choices' didn't matter or change anything. That was no true in DAO, and I don't remember anyone accusing DAO of being a game without meaningful choices that shape the world around you.
Precisely.
Have to say I agree here as well. Yes, the plot was pre-set in DAO, but how it played out and what happened to everyone at the end was very different depending on HOW you accomplished those pre-determined goals. your choices had a lot of meaning.
That said - I will say (and have said in other threads) that while you cannot affect the world in any significant way in DA2, you do affect the fates of your companions. That's something, but I think we should have some agency over what happens at the end of the game as well.
Actually, I think part of the problem here is that the story of DA2 was not finished. It ends right as the most interesting things and the final consequences of your decisions are about to happen.
Exactly. The choices you made in each quest in the game, rather it was a side, secondary or main plot affected the Storytelling of Who Hawke was prior to the set plot points. I could include some companion quests as well. The Seeker is trying to understand Hawke and your choices in the game is what she has doubts about and wants to learn more. This BS of "I am so limited in roleplaying" is getting old. You can that to my holier than thou Rogue and my current smart mouth mage.
And since DA2 is not a finished story you really can not see how your Champion did or comapanions unlike DA where it tells a small story at the ending of how your companions did after said events.
Modifié par AnotherAD, 15 mars 2011 - 04:44 .
#20
Posté 16 mars 2011 - 03:03
AbsolutGrndZer0
-
- Members
- 1 578 messages
YOu know what? I want to summon demons! I want to admit to Orsino that I am a blood mage! I want to resurrect Bethany with Necromancy, and bind a demon to help keep her alive!! Then, with us on his side, Orsino and I can CONQUER THE WORLD, after which I want to kill Orsino, as he's outlived his purpose in my nefarious plans!
Make it happen now Bioware, or I will never buy another one of your games again!
Make it happen now Bioware, or I will never buy another one of your games again!
