125 réponses à ce sujet

[StingingVelvet]

DA2 disappointed me in the area of choice and playing a character the way I want to, as in him/her having a personality and my decisions in the game being based on that personality.  I think the Merril introduction is a great example why.

Merril wants to open a magic door and so she uses blood magic to summon a demon to do so.  Now, her personal beliefs aside this is a pretty ****g HUGE deal in the world of Dragon Age.  A pro-chantry templar sort of player should want to kill her outright, or at least subdue her.  An Anders-like mage supporter who views evil mages as the reason all mages are hated and feared should certainly want to stop her or leave her or something.  Blood mages are found throughout the game are are always treated as evil characters to be stopped, abominations waiting to happen.

So... what are your potential responses to Merril?

"No problem" or "hey you're naughty but let's keep going."

Is it just me or is that lazy design?  In Dragon Age: Origins you could roleplay that scene a lot better, either leaving her or killing her or something.  In DA2 the whole game feels much more on rails and there is nothing I can do there but shrug my shoulders and move on.  For someone roleplaying a templar or something it must be absolutely infuriating.

I felt like there were moments like this all through the game, though this one is a great and easy to understand example.  Thoughts?

[The Big Nothing]

There were some things lacking in DA 2, but overall, I'm satisfied; it feels like now that they have the mechanics worked out, they can focus more on the story/choices.

[StingingVelvet]

The Big Nothing wrote...

There were some things lacking in DA 2, but overall, I'm satisfied; it feels like now that they have the mechanics worked out, they can focus more on the story/choices.

I don't think that's really an excuse since the previous game in the series got both right already.

[Piwowarski84]

StingingVelvet wrote...

The Big Nothing wrote...

There were some things lacking in DA 2, but overall, I'm satisfied; it feels like now that they have the mechanics worked out, they can focus more on the story/choices.

I don't think that's really an excuse since the previous game in the series got both right already.

True but the previous game was developed for much longer.

[Trapslick]

Piwowarski84 wrote...

StingingVelvet wrote...

The Big Nothing wrote...

There were some things lacking in DA 2, but overall, I'm satisfied; it feels like now that they have the mechanics worked out, they can focus more on the story/choices.

I don't think that's really an excuse since the previous game in the series got both right already.

True but the previous game was developed for much longer.

like 4x longer... i still think they should've takin at least a month or 2 extra to work out some of these bugs... the out of combat heals when revived things really tick me off.

[Icy Magebane]

The glitches are inexcusable at this point. Many of them are game-breaking... I don't know how anyone could beat Nightmare if they got that stacking -5% atttack speed bug from befriending Isabela. At first I didn't believe that the decrease in development time, was a huge problem, but this game's overall lack of polish speaks volumes.

I agree that there were many conflicts between the player class and the storyline. Particularly if one plays as a Templar, Mage, or Blood Mage. There are just too many inconsistencies with stated lore and how these classes dialogue and story options are handled in-game. So overall, I think they just ran out of time. I don't believe that Bioware would intentionally dismiss small details that could lead to major alterations in plot (and therefore, major bonuses to replay value), if they had the ability to implement them.

No option to tell Blood Mages to chill out because you wanted to aid them? Not cool...

On the other hand, a linear story is more manageable when you take into account the number of sequels they have planned. The more you alter the basics of the story, the less control Bioware has over the outcome. While I don't agree with this, it's better than retcons.

[XX55XX]

Good point there. Replaying the game as a pro-Chantry person, I too thought it was curious I couldn't threaten Anders or Merrill over their use of magic and refusal to submit to the Circle.

You could kill Zevran in the first game when you met him.

[Darker_than_black]

Icy Magebane wrote...

The glitches are inexcusable at this point. Many of them are game-breaking... I don't know how anyone could beat Nightmare if they got that stacking -5% atttack speed bug from befriending Isabela. At first I didn't believe that the decrease in development time, was a huge problem, but this game's overall lack of polish speaks volumes.

I agree that there were many conflicts between the player class and the storyline. Particularly if one plays as a Templar, Mage, or Blood Mage. There are just too many inconsistencies with stated lore and how these classes dialogue and story options are handled in-game. So overall, I think they just ran out of time. I don't believe that Bioware would intentionally dismiss small details that could lead to major alterations in plot (and therefore, major bonuses to replay value), if they had the ability to implement them.

No option to tell Blood Mages to chill out because you wanted to aid them? Not cool...

On the other hand, a linear story is more manageable when you take into account the number of sequels they have planned. The more you alter the basics of the story, the less control Bioware has over the outcome. While I don't agree with this, it's better than retcons.

I agree. Maybe we can blame EA for the short development time (and even if its not their doing, it always feels nice to blame EA).

I played as a blood mage on my first playthrough and it really bugged me that it didn't change dialouge or people's opinions one bit. When confronted with blood mages in the game all you could do was either condem them/kill them or try to tell them in a more diplomatic tone that "blood magic is wrong".  Similair examples the other way around, if you wanted to be a really harsch "mage-hater", it wasn't really possible.

[Dave of Canada]

It's called "but thou must", Origins has them too.

[Noatz]

StingingVelvet wrote...

The Big Nothing wrote...

There were some things lacking in DA 2, but overall, I'm satisfied; it feels like now that they have the mechanics worked out, they can focus more on the story/choices.

I don't think that's really an excuse since the previous game in the series got both right already.

With its comparitively clunky combat and inventory systems you can't really say this with any credibility.

As for the Merril introduction, I kind of agree that your options are restricted here which may leave players trying to play some zealous anti mage nut (though this doesn't make a huge amount of sense given Hawke's background) out in the cold. But lets look at some of what happened in Origins. You take Morrigan to the Circle tower. MISTAKE. Wynne will fight you to the death rather than allow an apostate into the tower. You may now choose to either ****** off Morrigan or kill the only character who has access to the spirit healer specialisation (which is overbearingly useful to you from a gameplay pov). This is hardly a perfect situation, and can go on record as an example as to how unlimited choice is not always a good thing (I had to reload when this happened to me).

Lastly Origins took much longer to develop mostly because they had to build a brand new game engine. DA2 uses the same engine. Of course DA2 is still shorter than Origins and uses less environments but still, claiming the games lesser choice is the reason for the shorter development is erroneous.

[DarthSliver]

Well the whole being a mage thing is out of whack here. Look at Fenris, he hates Mages to the core so in theory being a Mage should make it nearly impossible to Romance him.
I do think Bioware should have told EA they needed more time on DA2, there are quite a few things that contradict given Lore in DA:O. Also even what we see in DA2.

[Mykel54]

I agree, there are many other examples where the illusion of choice is obvious. To point another one related to Merril, the games tell you that she may get possesed if you do her quest, even your companions comment on it, and yet you have no choice but do it. As you do it you find out that no matter if you warn keeper marethari or not, the keeper will always appear to save Merril. It would have been a lot better if not warning the keeper would result in merrill getting possesed, giving an actual choice on it.

Also if Bioware wanted you to really do the quest, they could make it so that if you decline, you have some time in which merril is there if you change your mind. After the next act (or several quests) you could get a letter of a neighbour of merril saying that she has been missing for some time, then you could go and find out what happened to her (like she was possesed and the dalish killed her).

I miss the kind of choice that was still present in origins, a lot more meaningful that the majority of very minor choices you make in DA2.

[StingingVelvet]

Noatz wrote...

With its comparitively clunky combat and inventory systems you can't really say this with any credibility.

Well that's your opinion I guess, but I prefer both of those in DAO compared to DA2 overall.

As for the Merril introduction, I kind of agree that your options are restricted here which may leave players trying to play some zealous anti mage nut (though this doesn't make a huge amount of sense given Hawke's background) out in the cold.

Firstly I don't want to play Hawke's background, I want to roleplay a character.  I guess that's one of the fundamental problems here... DAO was about roleplaying a character while DA2, like Mass Effect, is more about playing a character Bioware designed.  I prefer the former.

Secondly blood magic is not something only an "anti-mage nut" would want to stop.  It is the calling of demons and considered quite evil in pretty much every other situation we see it in througout both games.  Why Merril can do it so casually and you're not allowed to have a serious problem with it is beyond me.

[XX-Pyro]

You need Merrill to complete the quest. Killing her would lead to a very angry Flemeth, and we don't want that. Besides, my Warden wanted to live a life with the Darkspawn, and help attack Denerim, the city that abused him so.

That wasn't possible though, shame.

[AlexXIV]

Hawke is a predefined character and comes from a family of apostates.

There are worse things than this that are wrong with the choices in DA2. For example having a choice and then finding out that it didn't change anything.

[XX-Pyro]

AlexXIV wrote...

Hawke is a predefined character and comes from a family of apostates.

There are worse things than this that are wrong with the choices in DA2. For example having a choice and then finding out that it didn't change anything.

This, pretty much.

I would rather have had choices in things such as choosing my final boss (Meredith or Orsino,) or another one could have been something like saving Leandra or your surviving sibling would have been interesting. Obviously the latter wouldn't be available if your sibling died in the Deep Roads, but something like that would have been interesting.

[Frisco Deuce]

My Hawke left Merill in the Alienage saying I don't want to be seen with a blood mage and never did a quest involving her after that. Yet she still ends up getting kidnapped by Grace and the game tries so hard to make me call her my friend, then after that she still shows up at the end of the game like she's been with Hawke the entire time. So much for choice in DA 2

[Pileyourbodies]

Hawke may be predefined and come from a family of apostates but none of them are blood mages.

[AlexXIV]

Pileyourbodies wrote...

Hawke may be predefined and come from a family of apostates but none of them are blood mages.

Well we know that Bethany isn't one. The rest could have been for all we know.

[Kurupt87]

StingingVelvet wrote...

Secondly blood magic is not something only an "anti-mage nut" would want to stop.  It is the calling of demons and considered quite evil in pretty much every other situation we see it in througout both games.  Why Merril can do it so casually and you're not allowed to have a serious problem with it is beyond me.

That would be because Blood Magic is not inherently bad, only the humans (because of the Chantry) view it so. Some aspects and spells are bad but the School is not.

If it were then whenever Hawke or THoF spec in Blood Magic there would afterwards be completely different dialogue choices, all varying in evilness, or at least some type of unavoidable quest that changes the PC. There are no gameplay issues or PC related attributes that says Blood Magic is evil, ergo it isn't.

All that ever points to BM being bad is the Chantry and characters' opinions, and in a game where the devs have said the codex itself is not to be trusted then I see no reason to believe Joe clueless Bloggs.

You may know that already and your problem is just with the RP'ing of the character, in which case what did you expect? You're playing a defined role in possibly the tightest storyline BW have ever written.

I will definitely concede that Hawke doesn't seem to give a hoot about BM though, which is decidedly odd. It could be eexplained away as Merril did it just like that, and with no obvious repurcusions, then just toddles off to continue the quest. All just leaving Hawke in a kind of dazed WTF for a prolonged period. You should at least be given the option to turn her over to the Templars though, it would only make sense.

[PirateT138]

That's because the game IS on rails, you're a passenger, that's it. No major choices, no real effect on the events that transpire. It's not a bad game, but you the choices you do make are as mundane as, "What pair of socks do I wear today?"

[StingingVelvet]

Frisco Deuce wrote...

My Hawke left Merill in the Alienage saying I don't want to be seen with a blood mage and never did a quest involving her after that. Yet she still ends up getting kidnapped by Grace and the game tries so hard to make me call her my friend, then after that she still shows up at the end of the game like she's been with Hawke the entire time. So much for choice in DA 2

Yeah, I actually pissed her off by treating her like an evil mage and not giving her what she wanted, then ignored ger in chapter three, and then at the end she shows up and says something like "I'm with you Hawke!"  I was like "what?"

Modifié par StingingVelvet, 19 mars 2011 - 11:50 .

[Clonedzero]

i didnt want to stop the blight in DA:O, it made absolutely no sense with my established character in or out og the game. so much for choice huh?

i was roleplaying an anti-chantry nonbeliever but i still had to be forced to search for the ashes of a mad woman that just about EVERYONE doubted actually existed and my character thought it was a HUGE waste of time and would rather get teagan to just take over for his brother. but NOPE. so much for choice huh?


see i can nitpick too.

[Kurupt87]

PirateT138 wrote...

That's because the game IS on rails, you're a passenger, that's it. No major choices, no real effect on the events that transpire. It's not a bad game, but you the choices you do make are as mundane as, "What pair of socks do I wear today?"

I enjoyed the gameplay and story but you are quite right, as a whole the game is just not right.

If you think about it, it's quite impressive how they make the player decide on weighty moral decisions time and again that turn out to mean absolutely nothing. There are numerous decisions where you stop playing and have to sit there and think for a good while, that is absolutely brilliant and I applaud the BW writers for it.

What I don't applaud them for is the fact that none of it means anything, that irks me horribly. Testing people's morals is an intensely personal thing, to find out they mean nothing is incredibly demeaning.

We play fantasy games to escape the superfluity of our daily lives, to then have that reinforced within an industry leading fantasy RPG is terribly tiresome.

Modifié par Kurupt87, 20 mars 2011 - 12:09 .

[StingingVelvet]

Clonedzero wrote...

i didnt want to stop the blight in DA:O, it made absolutely no sense with my established character in or out og the game. so much for choice huh?

i was roleplaying an anti-chantry nonbeliever but i still had to be forced to search for the ashes of a mad woman that just about EVERYONE doubted actually existed and my character thought it was a HUGE waste of time and would rather get teagan to just take over for his brother. but NOPE. so much for choice huh?


see i can nitpick too.

None of Bioware's games offer you the choices of some other RPGs like Fallout New Vegas or Gothic, but Origins was much better at it than DA2 is.  I guess that's my point.