91 réponses à ce sujet

[Enorats]

**SPOILER ALERT**

After playing through Dragon Age 2 several times I must say I'm astounded at how poorly choices were handled in this game compared to the Origins and Awakenings. 

To give several examples, my first playthrough I saved Keran and Grace. Keran remained a templar and Grace was set free. Later on, Keran hid while I slaughtered his friends and then told me about Bethany being kidnapped from the Circle (she was not taken into the Deep Roads). Grace was working with Thrask, went evil mode.. and you all know the rest I'm sure.

In my second game I saved Keran and Grace, but had Keran removed from the Templar order and handed Grace over to the Circle... alive. Bethany was taken into the Deep Roads, along with Anders. She became a Gray Warden, and her personality visibly changed by the next time I met her. However, these choices led to the EXACT same events.. down to every dialogue line. Bethany even comments about how fighting templars isn't a good idea... as a Grey Warden.

In the end, I'm left with a tremendous feeling of having a mere illusion of choice. I have no real effect on the story, my choices don't matter. Throughout the first game I kept track of anyone that I saved or helped that later became a problem. In my second game I eliminated these people as early as possible, or at least didn't help them. In the end, it made absolutely no difference...

Another example is killing the blood mage tracking the murderer in Act 2 (Prime Suspect I believe), or allowing him to continue tracking him. The events play out exactly the same regardless as to your choice. The Templar tracking him is still killed, your Mother kidnapped, you track him to his lair in the foundry, your Mother is killed, and you kill him. Zero differences.

About the only choice I can see making a difference is letting Bethany die, which I assume would lead to the kidnapping of one of my party members.. likely the love interest if one exists. Even this would have little to no effect on the story. Its also possible that letting the Templars kill Grace and/or make her tranquil would change these events, but I have a feeling that choosing that option would simply lead to the mages attacking and incapacitating us, escaping in the process and therefore not changing events at all. Has anyone tried this?

[Everwarden]

Right you are.

This time, instead of letting the player make choices.. you get to ride The Plot Express Railroad™! Choo choo!

Bioware realized what a chore it was for twelve year olds to actually -think- about what their character would do in a morally dubious situation, so they made the wise design choice of just having it not matter! Yay for railroading!

[Tleining]

did you compare how the game changes when supporting Mages or Templars? If you support the mages, you get Quests to frame Templars. If you support the Templars, the Chanter's Board gives Quest to hunt down Mages. As a Mage Supporter, Meredith comments on how your Name shows up way too much on her reports. As a Templar Supporter, she is glad to see you.

[TheRevanchist]

As much as I hate to say it yea...choices were utterly meaningless to the game this time around from my perspective...No matter who you side with you always end up fighting both Orsino and Meredith...the "Kirkwall Killer" senario is a big one for me. The mage rebellion with Thrask and Grace was a serious disapointment...overall the choices were mearly cosmedic, but realisticly to say Origins lacked any sort of railroading is just foolish and blatent lies. You can never choose to not kill the Archdemon...you can never choose to not wake Eamon up...you can never choose to not gather allies...you can never choose to not be a Grey Warden. I mean really Origins also contained the Railroad Express...it just hide it better.

[Enorats]

Hmm. Just beat the game while supporting the Templars. Funny how the ending was exactly the same too... the mages still rebelled and everything.

Origins did "hide" things better, but it was also much better at incorporating and responding to your choices. One doesn't have to look any farther than your choice of gender, class, race, and origin story to see that choices impact the game. A female human noble warrior/rogue can marry Alistair if you've also chosen to romance him, provided the player correctly navigated Alistair's companion quest. This results in the Warden becoming Queen of Ferelden.

Its true that you were forced into certain things in Origins, but in almost every case the choices you were allowed to make had meaning and impact. Often, choices the player made had lasting consequences, and those that did not show up in the game itself were visible in the ending movie. Nearly the exact opposite is true in DA2. You can simply not do many quests, and the choices you make during quests are completely and entirely pointless.. from the most minor to the most important world shattering decisions. The story, especially the ending movie, hardly changes even if the player makes the exact opposite decisions throughout the entire game.

[Caion]

Quick question: By the time I had to fight Grace I had forgotten who she was and why she wanted me dead. What quest was she from, again?

[Pyrate_d]

You're completely right, and this was endlessly frustrating. My only hope is that this is just a consequence of the game being ridiculously rushed (for whatever reason), and that Bioware will take their time with the sequel.

[Lithuasil]

The whole thing feels somewhat like parts of the design team knew they needed a specific ending for da3 to work, but the other parts weren't in on the joke.
If that ending is required, sure, lead us there, the archdemon died in origins no matter what you did (spoiler alert). Rather then offering the option of siding with the templars, they should've just given us different ways to overthrow meredith. After all, hawke being friend, daughter and sister to apostates, and possibly one herself, that choice can reasonably be expected, anyway.

[Icy Magebane]

I think the problem stems from Bioware realizing that their ambitions were too high for their capabilities. They created too many variables with DA:O and either could not or would not account for all the possible worlds that players would spawn. Thus, Anders and Leliana survive no matter what, if she actually DID survive she doesn't recognize the Warden as an LI (if that happened), the Warden is "missing" even though several players imported from US files... plus, there are a ton of problems with "flags" that they never corrected in DA:O, most of which deal with the ending (huge problems with Anora, Alistair, the boons, etc). DA2 even has problems with the Architect being the Warden's ally, regardless of whether or not you killed him. Even if the import screen says he die, Nathaniel says he survived!

I think that this time around, they made a story that appeared to have variables that all led to the same conclusions. That way, they wouldn't have these problems for the next game.

I'm not trying to make them seem... incompetent. They over-extended themselves and have toned down the scope of what they are trying to accomplish, that's all. Just my take on the situation.

Caion wrote...

Quick question: By the time I had to fight
Grace I had forgotten who she was and why she wanted me dead. What quest
was she from, again?

She was one of the blood mage apprentices hiding in a cave... there was a templar out front that you could either kill or help, and one of the apprentices tried to run away when he noticed that the others were crazy.  Something like that... lol... to be honest, I didn't recognize her either.

Modifié par Icy Magebane, 15 mars 2011 - 11:20 .

[Enorats]

Caion

Grace was the mage that was from Sebastian's hometown. The circle there was destroyed and the mages escaped on their way to the Gallows. Thrask located them in the cave, and we went in to talk them into surrendering. The High Enchanter was in the cave, he attacks.. we kill him. Grace says she and the other mages are innocent, and you had to choose to help them escape by talking to Thrask, help them escape by killing Thrask, turning them over to the Templars and allowing them to be killed, or turning them over and ensuring their safety.

[Alanosborn1991]

You cant kill Thrask though and even if you kill all those Templars he still helps the mages anyway.

Thrask gets killed by Grace when they have your borther/sister grey warden hostage

[Enorats]

Icy Magebane -

That may be the case. I'd wager that Dragon Age 3 would be quite a challenge to make had Dragon Age 2 continued down the same path that Origins started. However, that was the best part about Origins. It was what made it such a great game, and the lack of choice in DA2 is what makes it a mediocre game.. in my opinion at least.

[KAAurious]

I'll say this much, it had more choice than DA:O. DA:O gave you two options.

1: Do things right and pander to everyone if possible.
2: Do things differently and risk losing your allies.
- Andraste's Ashes
- Redcliffe
- Loghain

I hate to say it, you know, insulting the original. But there's a difference between giving you some semblance of choice versus giving you options which are intended to toss your team into the blender leaving you with warriors and nothing else.

Modifié par KAAurious, 15 mars 2011 - 11:21 .

[Caion]

Thanks for the answer.

But ... I talked the Templars into walking away and Grace thanked me for saving her. It makes no sense for her to want to kill me later. Now I see what you guys are talking about.

Modifié par Caion, 15 mars 2011 - 11:22 .

[errant_knight]

We got choices. We just failed each and every time. I'm not surprised Hawke disappeared, probably with the applicable Cartman quote.

[Icy Magebane]

I think DA:O gave people more freedom than the vast majority of games... you could help the werewolves or the Dalish, cure the werewolves and then kill them, kill them rather than cure them, kill only Varenthorn (hm... is that the right guy?), etc. That was one quest. Redcliffe gave you a ton of options before you even reached the castle... I mean honestly, that game begged for multiple playthoughs so you could see all the possibilities. Every quest was like that, and they didn't all lead to the same place. Sure, you had to eventually gather allies and fight the Archdemon, but that's the most basic aspect of the story. Your army could be different every time, if you so desired.

The only reason I plan to play DA2 again is to be a warrior this time rather than a mage...

@KAAurious... I just read that.  See, I disagree because you didn't end up with all warriors unless that was your intention.  You could have done the ritual if you wanted a mage, and you could have had Zevran if you wanted a rogue while defiling the Urn.  What you are describing sounds like intentionally acting a certain way to  a) make everyone angry with you, and wind up with 0 allies except those who don't care what you do.  I think the basic idea is that even if you DO play that way, you still have a hell of a lot of interesting options along that path.  And each time you play, there are opportunities to shape the story and team as you see fit.

Modifié par Icy Magebane, 15 mars 2011 - 11:29 .

[Enorats]

DA:O had far more choice than 2. DA2 has no choices. Not real ones anyway.. any choice you make leads to exactly the same consequences. You can play through twice, making exactly the opposite decision in each conversation.. and end up playing the same story.

DA:O could be played many times over with vastly different results that depended on many different variables.

[Tleining]

@ Enorats
NO. See my first post. The end is the same, but that was in Origins as well. Side with the Dalish or wipe them out, you fight the Archdemon all the same.

Personally, i really like the results of the Rivalry/Friendship System. In my first playthrough, Fenris and Isabela were on the Rivalry Path. Their reactions to me and the dialogue i had with them was very different from what i had in my 2nd, where i was friendly with both of them.

[KAAurious]

Enorats wrote...

DA:O had far more choice than 2. DA2 has no choices. Not real ones anyway.. any choice you make leads to exactly the same consequences. You can play through twice, making exactly the opposite decision in each conversation.. and end up playing the same story.

DA:O could be played many times over with vastly different results that depended on many different variables.

You pick Bhelen or Harrowmont, yet the quests and everything are identical for the most part.

You pick the werewolves or the elves? Well, if Zevran is your party he'll **** and moan.

You pick the Templars and you lose your healer. (Oh hey! A trend!)

The fact is, everytime they put you on the spot in DA:O you had "options", but in reality they weren't much. Unless you were really hellbent on trying to go through the game as a minimalist with as few of allies as possible. For people who want options when forming their party, this was group suicide. Not to mention? Non-core quests in DA:O gave you little/no options.

[Icy Magebane]

@Tleining: But those are only dialogue options... you still have no control over the story or the events that take place in the game...

[Dean_the_Young]

I'd disagree that the illusion of choice was any better in Origins. All that came to, in the end, were about five minutes worth of differences: ending dialogue for the recruitment quests, ambassadors leading into the Darkspawn Battle, and the epilogue slide. Storywise, it was always a case of 'Insert Name/Model here.'

Which, to be frank, is how it's always going to be with the medium. The importance isn't wildly varying outcomes and extensive paths in the story structure, since those never really are an option in the first place, but changes in dialogue and story tone to reflect what you've done.

Story structure doesn't, and can't, change radically. Not if you want a good product. A restriction of the medium is that you're always going to be on the same general path regardless, and only easily replaceable things might change. What's really important is the illusion of choice: the OP says it disparagingly, but it's the best virtue. You need to be able to believe, without metagaming, that your outcome was a natural outcome from your choices. The comparison is what you could expect, not metagaming analysis of the story structure.


Case in point, the Hawke sibling. No matter who it is, no matter what you do, structurally the story is always the same. At the end of the first act, the sibling is no longer with you. No matter what you do, they won't be an available companion.

What's important, however, is the illusion that what you do affects that. In the end, letting them die, go away, or anything else is irrelevant. The story doesn't really change: the only change of significance is another party member for the final battle if they survive. Otherwise? It's the illusion that what you did decided their fate, and your story.

[Alanosborn1991]

What sucks is that my Lady Hawke Blood Mage had to kill so many blood mages to advance the stupid story when I wanted to support them.

She sided with Orsino at every turn and wanted to overthrow Meredith with the whole templars working with mages thing but nope.

Bioware makes Grace all crazy and you have to kill everyone then Cullen comes and breaks everyone up like a school fight.

In the end though it was worth it cuz Default blood smear Mage Champion got to be fugitives with Anders and protect each other.

Lady Hawke: "Screw you guys, Im going home to Anders"

[Icy Magebane]

@KAAurious... the outcome of every quest you just described is different based on your decisons. Behlen and Harrowmont don't rule Orzamarr in the same way. The Dalish storyline is forever altered by your hand, and the same is true for the Circle. If you are that worried about party members, blame the approval system. That isn't a reflection of the amount of choices and their impact on the story.

[Group Theory]

Yeah, DA2 had no satisfying choices at all. The only choice I had trouble with was deciding whether or not to kill Anders - I was struggling because I didn't want to gimp my party, not because the story made me actually care about what happened.

I definitely agree that the game creates an illusion of choice, which makes me not care at all about the dialog choices I make. It makes it feel as if we're not role playing Hawke, but just watching a pre-determined story unfold.

Something that made me roll my eyes was at the beginning of the second act. The Vicount asked me to go talk to the Qunari, and I basically told him to screw himself. Then he was like "No no, just talk to them," and then I received the quest to go to the Qunari leader. It was stupid even to allow me to refuse him, since the game makes you do it anyway.

[Enorats]

The ending to origins was different every time I played through it. Yes, the Archdemon died. How he died could change, though the "real" ending is assumed to be the one involving Morrigan (which DA2 didn't even bother to conclude.. not unlike Morrigan's DLC).

The ending movie itself could also change drastically to reflect the player's decisions.

The problem here is that we don't get the option to actually choose anything. In origins we could choose between many different options (as Icy magebane just pointed out with regards to the Dalish) and each of those options led to unique branches in the ending of the game. DA2 makes absolutely no effort to do this, and instead removes any semblance of choice.

Often, DA2 is so good at removing choice that it doesn't even make sense. The entire questline involving Grace and Keran is a great example. No matter what you do, the outcome is identical. Dozens of variables, many of which SHOULD logically lead down different paths.. but don't. Heck, we don't even get the option to support them. We kill them on sight, because.. well, apparently Hawke liked Meredith that day?