60 réponses à ce sujet

[DrGulag]

in DA:O, you end up killing the Arch Demon, no matter what.

I didn't. Loghain redeemed himself.

I chose the ruler in Orzammar. The fate of the anvil and potentially the most powerful army in Thedas would come to be if I so chose. The fate of the Circle was mine to decide. I could choose a side in the Brecilian forest, kill everyone or make peace. I was constantly involved in politics and so on.

Lets not fool ourselves. It's not even comparable.

Modifié par DrGulag, 18 mars 2011 - 08:36 .

[rcollins1701]

Parrk wrote...

Not enough is said about the aggregate effects of attitude choices. I was dismayed to find that when I chose the sarcasm option too oftem in the early game, I was not able to solve the dalish assassin encounter without killing 15 dalish.

That is not the type of choice or control that some are complaining about not having though. No, what they want is far more ludicrous. They want to be able to use information about what happens in the end of the game to make decisions about the early game and prevent those things from happening.

They are not at all satisfied by the constraints of space-time, or the notion of imperfect information. The player knows that anders is gonna bomb the church so dammit I want my toon to have the opportunity to stop him......

If you want to metagame to that degree then why not just use a save generator and play it that way?

Then they will complain that they cannot alter the font of the save generator. Some people are addicted to being unsatisfied.

I do so concur. And brilliant use of the term 'metagame' by the way.

[DrGulag]

You either play for an result, or you play to create a character. Don't you think knowing what would happen before you make decision is more linear than "conversation lottery"?

I dont understand your logic at all. So what you are basically saying that removing the option to have any say over dialogue makes the game less linear?

So if we take out the dialogue wheel completely it's more unpredictable. Yeah that's pretty much a given. But I dont buy BioWare games to play a pre-determined adventure game. 

I want to see the all the possible options and have the illusion that I'm the driving force behind the story and not the other way around.

Modifié par DrGulag, 18 mars 2011 - 08:41 .

[Madkipz]

CRISIS1717 wrote...

fluorine7 wrote...

I thought if you let Qunari take Isabella, the Qunaris will convert her...Can you imagine a straight face Isabella who serves the demand of Qun? I'd pay to see that....LOL.

I assumed they were going to execute her, the Qunari don't take kindly to thieves and they don't care for anyone who isn't a follower of the Qun.

Fenris explains it in great detail in one of those random conversations if he and isabella are in your party. They would either re educate her into the Qun or remake her into a mindless husk. With those two options laid bare id say she would choose to follow the Qun ;D.

As for Actions that have consequences, i would have killed for real actions but sadly Hawke no matter the dialog conversation would be a follower in the wake of the grey warden. There is not a single epic conversation in the entire game that give me goosebumps or "nerdchills" and ultimately all you do is kill companions you didnt care much for in the first place and if you did care, you can persuade them. 

This game is as shallow as an empty bottle of water. The conversations eventually gnaw at my subconcious until i start considering watching pain dry instead. Hawke doesnt even have CUTSCENE powers like shepard but instead rely on her/his allies to do the cutscene powers like Varrick persuading some templars to save a few blood mages, or kill the rock demon abomination thingy or Fenris sticking his blue glowing hand into some random tevinter magister to make him talk.

Oh noes if i dont befriend and do their sidequests they might disagree and try to kill me and you see this as choice? its punishment for being lazy is all.

WHEN IS IT HAWKES TURN TO BE EPIC? 

[fluorine7]

What I'm saying is that, in reality, you don't know what kind of result your choices will lead to. You can make educated guess, but in the end, you just don't know. Because there're other factors that will influence the outcome of an event.

You can only choose whatever feels the best, or whatever you believe to be the right thing to do. And ultimately, even things doesn't go as you wanted, you know you make the right choice. And if you know it would end up this way, you would make the same decision again, not because the result, but rather, it clears your conscience.

That's what I mean by play to create a character vs play to reach a certain result.

[DrGulag]

That is not the type of choice or control that some are complaining about not having though. No, what they want is far more ludicrous. They want to be able to use information about what happens in the end of the game to make decisions about the early game and prevent those things from happening.

They are not at all satisfied by the constraints of space-time, or the notion of imperfect information. The player knows that anders is gonna bomb the church so dammit I want my toon to have the opportunity to stop him......

When I started my second playthrough in Dragon Age : Origins I just wanted to see how different choices would effect Ferelden.

If there's no difference, why even have the possibility to choose what to say in a conversation?

In Dragon Age 2 there were many conversations where the choice didn't matter at all.

In Origins you constantly felt like you were making the calls and creating the story as you travelled. You were able to lie, intimidate, charm, be a virtuous hero or a total bastard. You felt like you had options during every main quest. The same cant be said about DA2

ps. And dont get me started on the romances.

*click heart icon to have sex*

Come on.

Modifié par DrGulag, 18 mars 2011 - 08:54 .

[Madkipz]

Lo and behold, characters can abandon you or you will have to face them in a bout untill either die and you call this choice?

I call it lazyness. If you could stop Anders, then i might have taken you up on it but you cant. Hawke does not even have cutscene powers based on how many red / purple or green dialogue options you choose nor does the game care if you build the relationship as a rival or as a friend.

YES I ROMANCED MY RIVAL FENRIS and it was good, he also came to help the circle.

YES I ****ed isabella and made her my rival, AND LO AND BEHOLD SHE SHOWS UP WITH THE BOOK.

Because the options you choose in dialogue does not matter, all that matters is that you do every sidequest and have him tag along enough to get friend or rival bonus then you can talk him to do anything you want.

[fluorine7]

Madkipz wrote...

Oh noes if i dont befriend and do their sidequests they might disagree and try to kill me and you see this as choice? its punishment for being lazy is all.

WHEN IS IT HAWKES TURN TO BE EPIC? 

if you don't care about friends, don't help them out when they needed you the most, why would they stay by you when you need them? especially when they don't even agree with your choices? of course they'll turn on you. That's not punishment, that's normal human behavior. 

[ricco19]

Werrf wrote...

You're not being funnelled to the same outcomes, you're being funnelled to different outcomes in your character's life. The end result for the city will be very similar, no matter what. The end result for Hawke will be different. She may have a sister alive, a brother alive, both dead, one alive but gone with the Grey Wardens. She may be gay, straight, bi; may be a diplomat, a sarcastic ****, a psycho, a sarcastic psycho, a psychotic diplomat, a mercenary, rebel; You couldn't make any of these choices, apart from the gay/straight/bi one, in Origins.

And all of those things are ultimately irrelevant by the time the game ends. And most of what you pointed out were simply different paths to the same outcome. No matter what, one of your siblings die in the begining. No matter what, you lose your other sibling after act 2, and has no impact on anything. No matter what, your mom gets murdered in act 2. No matter what Anders becomes a terrorist.

I see what you are saying though. You are making choices on the outcome of Hawkes life, not the outcome of the main plot. I just found that a bit dissapointing because Hawke's life is ****ed up and depressing, even if you are trying to make good decisions.

Look, I loved this game, but I think the way they handled all of the decision making was silly. If you are going to give us the ability to act a certain way and make crazy decisions, make these decisions have some sort of impact on the story.

[Medhia Nox]

To me, this should have been the prologue to the real game. However, I will not be paying another 60$ to play the real game. I'm not sure I'll even pay 30 at this point.

From the first moment I met him I was aware that Anders was a freedom fighter - that Anders was an abomination. After three years - I knew Anders was unstable. During the quest where he tricks Hawke (not me) into making a bomb - I knew that the end result of this game was not a roleplay experience, but a story.

If you play this story exactly like Bioware intended - and you hate the Chantry and the Templars and support mages no matter how many evil acts they commit - you will likely be satisfied with the "choices". But I did not play that way - I am not interested in that character at all.

Had Bioware perhaps stated: "This is a set course which cannot be altered. It is meant to tell our story - you will be able to choose who you romance and that's about it." Then I would have been able to make a better choice. As it is - I've learned my lesson and will wait for reviews in the future.

I did not purchase this game to be told a story. If I want something told to me - I will play any number of excellent games. When I want to be the lead - manipulating the events of a tale - then I play an RPG.

I believe Hawke might be the lead in the Expansion to this game - but in Dragon Age 2 he is a helpless witness. This is just my opinion.

[fluorine7]

I actually quite like Templars, and I think mages should be put under control. The game show enough blood mage/abomination horror to counter the templar oppression (mother's death, for example). in the end, Orsino turns into a monster, Meredith is mad.

So there's really no obvious good side or evil side. You do what you think is right, and let the event run its course.

[DrGulag]

You're not being funnelled to the same outcomes, you're being funnelled to different outcomes in your character's life. The end result for the city will be very similar,

And that's what killed the whole experience for me. Days of our lives in Kirkwall. You can choose to be a lesbian but having choices that effect the world is a no no. 

This should never have been named Dragon Age 2.

It's a spin-off from my point of view. Dragon Age : Kirkwall ate my family

Modifié par DrGulag, 18 mars 2011 - 09:01 .

[ricco19]

Medhia Nox wrote...

If you play this story exactly like Bioware intended - and you hate the Chantry and the Templars and support mages no matter how many evil acts they commit - you will likely be satisfied with the "choices". But I did not play that way - I am not interested in that character at all..

For me I just wanted peace. The templars wanted to kill all the mages, and the mages just wanted to be free, so I sided with the mages. I was not satisfied at all with the choices. Ander's slaughtered a bunch of innocent people when their could have been compromise. Orsino who seemed level headed and peace driven used blood magic for no reason. So Orsino was in a room with the Champion and all of his allies, and thinks using blood magic is a good idea. Yeah, right.

[Dangerfoot]

Medhia Nox wrote...

To me, this should have been the prologue to the real game. However, I will not be paying another 60$ to play the real game. I'm not sure I'll even pay 30 at this point.

From the first moment I met him I was aware that Anders was a freedom fighter - that Anders was an abomination. After three years - I knew Anders was unstable. During the quest where he tricks Hawke (not me) into making a bomb - I knew that the end result of this game was not a roleplay experience, but a story.

If you play this story exactly like Bioware intended - and you hate the Chantry and the Templars and support mages no matter how many evil acts they commit - you will likely be satisfied with the "choices". But I did not play that way - I am not interested in that character at all.

Had Bioware perhaps stated: "This is a set course which cannot be altered. It is meant to tell our story - you will be able to choose who you romance and that's about it." Then I would have been able to make a better choice. As it is - I've learned my lesson and will wait for reviews in the future.

I did not purchase this game to be told a story. If I want something told to me - I will play any number of excellent games. When I want to be the lead - manipulating the events of a tale - then I play an RPG.

I believe Hawke might be the lead in the Expansion to this game - but in Dragon Age 2 he is a helpless witness. This is just my opinion.

It's a very good opinion, I think.

I am excited for the next game, but I won't be preordering it on the off chance that it is another "story" as you put it.

[AlexXIV]

So to pick up your example OP.

No friendship with Isabella. She leaves, the book is gone. I have to face the Qunari. I have to kill the Qunari.

Friendship with Isabella. She leaves with the book. She comes back with the book. The Qunari wants to take Isabella. So now I have the choice to kill the Qunari or let him take Isabella.

Result of both paths: Champion of Kirkwall. The only really difference would be to build a friendship with Isabella so she comes back and than give her to the Qunari. Which makes sense to you? In that case the Arishok lives.

People don't complain because they don't get a dialogue option or whatever to choose. They complain that your choices don't matter. The only choice you ever get is as to which companion you can use. Hm ... do I buy the Sebastian DLC or do I not ... choices, choices. And this part of the game isn't even done well since you simply can pick the party members who get most approval for a quest and max them all out, even if they have completely different views. And your family is not available most of the time. And you say bravo. Ok. Whatever.

Not even in quests where you could have a choice because they are not main plot relevant. For example Grace. There could be a choice to solve it peacefully if you helped her before, but no, you killed her lover, so whatever you do she turns on you.

Your mother. There could be a way to save her, but no, of the 2 paths you can go, funnily one supposed to be faster due to bloodmagic, you get into a timewarp field and end up at the kidnapper at the same time as if you took the long road. No way to save her.

You can save all these 'choices' you have in your head and whenever you think about it you can be proud of what a hero you are. But the game doesn't recognize them. Have you in any of the narratives seen these things mentioned? No. Varric only talks about the main plot events which are streamlined. For the game you are Hawke, Champion of Kirkwall. Mage or Templar supporter. There is no more to you than that. Whether you kill Anders or let him go, nobody cares. Cassandra doesn't anyway and Varric doesn't bother to tell probably? Because Anders is absolutely unimportant, being the martyr and symbol of the mage uprise etc.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 18 mars 2011 - 09:08 .

[Medhia Nox]

@ ricco19 - I was a mage who was fine with the idea of reform, but knew the dangers of untrained minds. Leaving mages to just live out their lives without policing was suicidal to any country that housed them.

The Isabela situation really bothered me - but I was willing to let it go because I totally didn't see it coming. I was a little miffed that the Arishok respected me, but not enough to bring the book back. It really felt like:

"Arishok" How will you make amends?
"Hawke" I will get the book back.
"Arishok" [Thinks about it] No, that will take too much scripting and a whole lot more adventure and we're strapped for time. Sorry Hawke - now we fight!

====

I felt like the scenario with Mother was really powerful - until I realized it was another sham. It was just me being told a story - not at all based on my series of choices.

====

But the straw the broke the camel's back was the end. I knew the entire game that Anders was too dangerous to be free. It wasn't some 'shock'. I knew exactly what he was doing - and throughout the whole game I was SURE that I'd have some chance somewhere to stop his madness. But no - Bioware had a story to tell.

For seven years "my" Hawke lived with his head stuck up his ass. Other rebellious Hawkes were playing the right way. That's what makes me unhappy - there's a right way to play Dragon Age 2. As a rebellious mage.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 18 mars 2011 - 09:11 .

[Noatz]

DarkWulfy wrote...

This statement was a lot more valid 2 weeks ago before DA2 was released. But now that we have all had our taste of the game, and discovered first hand how our choices from DA:O affected DA2 (or rather how they DIDN'T), sadly I simply don't think this is an assumption we can make any more.

As I wrote before, they deliberately extricated Hawke from the events of Origins before all your choices took effect so that they didn't have to account for the multiple endings and write DA2 3-4-5 times over. And your choices still afffect the world in DA2: whichever family lost the succession war in Orzammar will have their last remaining lord appear fleeing the new king's assassins as per your choice in Origins, your choice to burn or save Amaranthine affects a quest in act 1, Alastair shows up as king in Act 3 if thats what happened for you in Origins etc. You can call these effects superficial but consider what you're in effect asking for expecting your myriad choices in Origins to all play a profound role in the plot.

You're not being funnelled to the same outcomes, you're being funnelled
to different outcomes in your character's life. The end result for the city
will be very similar, no matter what. The end result for Hawke will be
different. She may have a sister alive, a brother alive, both dead,
one alive but gone with the Grey Wardens. She may be gay, straight, bi;
may be a diplomat, a sarcastic ****, a psycho, a sarcastic psycho, a
psychotic diplomat, a mercenary, rebel; You couldn't make any of these
choices, apart from the gay/straight/bi one, in Origins.

This is actually an excellent point, and it won't be something we'll fully see until they release future content such as expansions in DA2 or DA3. What it appears they have done is catalogued your various responses throughout the game, presumably with the ultimate goal of producing an NPC version of Hawke that acts as close to how YOU played him/her throughout DA2 and its expansions as possible. Which will be remarkable if they manage to pull it off.

[Werrf]

And that's what killed the whole experience for me. Days of our lives in Kirkwall. You can choose to be a lesbian but having choices that effect the world is a no no.

It's not "a no no".  It's a different type of story.  Perhaps you didn't like that type of story.  That's a shame.  It's not the game's fault.

Bioware have been criticised for years for always telling the same story.  Google "Bioware formula", look at the image results.  See the very first image.  They've finally told a different story, and all you can do is **** and moan and make it less likely we'll get more imaginative or different stories.

[fluorine7]

I think in the end, we're just so used to the traditional RPG structure, that choice A leads to result A, Choice B leads to result B, that we refuse to see what DA 2 is trying to achieve here.

It is very easy for Bioware to change the ending into choice A leads to Orsino killing Meredith, and you fight Orsino, Choice B leads to Meredith killing Orsino and you end up fighting Meredith. I think people would be a lot happier this way EVEN the end result is the same as current DA2: both Orsino and Meredith is dead and Thedas is facing civil war.

[Medhia Nox]

flourine7 - that is MUCH closer to making me happy. Not completely - I would have to be able to make Anders Tranquil. But it would be a huge step.

[DrGulag]

The main thing is that most people see this game as a letdown. Dumbing down a system that has worked well over a decade. Why alienate your most loyal customers and just go for the quick buck?

The result : 

Professionals have given it a lower score when compared to DA:O and user scores are at rock bottom. Gamespot is pretty reliable and I think it stands at 7/10.

User score average over metacritic is around 4/10

There's a strong message here and I hope Bioware listens.Lets hope this storm fires them up and we will see some quality DLC's atleast.

Modifié par DrGulag, 18 mars 2011 - 09:41 .

[LobselVith8]

fluorine7 wrote...

But your decision DO count for something.

I agree. I like that the decisions counted for something. I enjoyed seeing the ripple effects of my Hero of Ferelden from the Surana background where Hawke encountered a former werewolf being confronted on his past deeds, or how I was able to help one of the last surviving members of the Harrowmont line escape to safety from the Carta since my Warden supported Bhelen for the throne of Orzammar. I think it's good to import our past choices and have our actions lead to an impact on the world around us, and I rather enjoyed DA2 myself.

[fluorine7]

Gamespot is 8.0 overall user score is 8.3

So no, DA2 is not universally hated as you might imagine.

You know that remind me about a psychology research I read about. people who drink Coke believes there're more people enjoy Coke than pepsi, while people who drink pepsi believes there're more people enjoy pepsi than coke, but in fact the static shows about half and half.

We automatically believe what we believe is the right thing, and everyone agrees.

[Marcy3655]

I actually felt pretty much the same about choices in DA:O, in that they didn't seem to make a big difference, small differences yes... and I think the same is true with the new one... it's just not feasible at this point in time to have a game as large as it would take to include huge changes in the outcome of choices.. small ones yes because they don't require multiple games being incorporated into one... it's just the limitations on games as they stand at present, but that could easily change over the coming years...

Regardless, I still love both games as they are both really well done..

M

[DrGulag]

The community average over gamespot is around 7.5 (adding up PC, PS3 and Xbo360) and that's a huge letdown for Bioware.

The community score over metacritic is an ABYSMAL 4 / 10 with thousands of reviews. Read through them and the complaints are not just some drone spam from 4chan.

There's no way to deny that. When has their major release received such a low score?

People, me included, are obviously disappointed but at the same time it's a testament how high the expectations are and how many followers Bioware has. It's not the end of the world but the company should listen to the public and think carefully how they wish move on from here.

Modifié par DrGulag, 18 mars 2011 - 09:58 .