100 réponses à ce sujet

[Foolsfolly]

I thought the characters had depth.

One of the things that add depth is contradiction. Merrill's sweet, adorable, and compassionate but she's a blood mage who cannot resist temptation. Anders is a healer and a terrorist. Meredith is correct that the Circle is corrupted but her methods lead to her accusation being proved true.

Another way to add depth is character motivation. It's hard to say the companions here do not have motivations. Anders wants a revolution. Aveline wants the guard to keep order. The Viscount wants peace. The Arishok wants his book back. Isabella wants money so she can back to the sea.

I think the characters have depth.

The story however isn't paced correctly. There's not enough drive or purpose to propel the story. The inciting incident for everything is either the Chantry explosion which is at the end of the game or the finding of the idol which is at the end of Act 1. If it's the Chantry it's too late in the game, if it's the Idol then it's a weak motivation because it's magical idol that we never learn anything about and is external from the main plot (Mage freedom vs Templar security).

The story is at odds with itself. The whole personal freedom (mages) vs public security (templars) is undermined by the fact that external and unrelated events frame them. The Circle in Kirkwall is invested with blood mages and abominations because Kirkwall has a thin Veil because of the Tevinter mages way back. And the Templars are led by a mad woman because an ancient Idol made her crazy.

That's the essential flaw of the story.

That and the pacing. Act 1 has no motivation. Act 2 has nothing to do with the main story (although, it's the best act), and Act 3 is both too little too late and too much too soon. It's forced and hurried and we know nothing of the players involved.

....whew...I think that got away from me a little.

[GunMoth]

MrStorm2K wrote...

Ok then, I'm going back to the good ol' "I disagree" response.

Can you get into the specifics on some of the characters you didn't like and why?

I have. But I shall again for the sake of misunderstandings. (I will make a list of characters I liked and disliked)

Fenris - Amnesia. He doesn't share his past or history. It is difficult to relate to him on a personal level because of this lack of information. Even when he does get his memory back, we see little change in his character nor does he discuss memories with you. His character is important because he represents the templar side of things. He has been hurt, decieved or oppressed by mages (like many cold hearted templars are) yet it is often difficult to see his side because no first hand experiences are shared with the player character in a believable way. It would be siding with the templars a more appealing option because of a mutual understanding. 

Merril - Knows a LOT about the Dalish lore. She's was supposed to be a keeper. However we only hear two stories from her. We don't hear about the Dalish life often. I know the Dalish aren't a part of the plot, but she is an EXTREMELY important character in terms of understanding mages and the issues they deal with. Making a deal with a demon because of her clan's history wasn't believable on an emotional level to me because I do not understand the pressure she could be facing? Her struggle could have been explored a lot more. 

Anders - No comment. He just makes my head explode with stupid ideas on how his character could have been to add alignment balance. (Good vs. evil etc etc) More of Justice could have been explored. I'm kind of upset he simply disappeared or "fused" into Anders. What became of the both of them etc. Or rather, that we as the player were not there for the transformation. He was entirely too foreign. But his craziness made for a good catalyst. 

Isabela + Varric - More information on Kirkwall. Socio-political structures etc. More stories about sailing and the stuggles topsiders deal with. 

Aveline - Pretty close to perfect in my opinion.  But she didn't have much to do with the actual plot. She served her purpose (allowing the player to understand the crime and the way status / careers work in Kirkwall) 

I REALLY wish you could speak with Sebastian or the grand cleric about the chantry in Kirkwall more. I really enjoyed how neutral they were, which was an interesting twist.

Pretty much, characters make you sensative to the struggles of each side of the mage vs. templar issue as well as the Qunari invasion. 

[MrStorm2K]

@ FoolsFolly

When I think of the story of DA2, it begins with a simple goal: Survive. It's about securing you and your family. The rest of the story is about how Hawke gets sucked in to Kirkwall.

The mage v. templar storyline is almost just a continuous side-story until the very end when you realize how serious and large-scale it actually is.

Modifié par MrStorm2K, 23 mars 2011 - 04:57 .

[GunMoth]

Foolsfolly wrote...

I thought the characters had depth.

One of the things that add depth is contradiction. Merrill's sweet, adorable, and compassionate but she's a blood mage who cannot resist temptation. Anders is a healer and a terrorist. Meredith is correct that the Circle is corrupted but her methods lead to her accusation being proved true.

Another way to add depth is character motivation. It's hard to say the companions here do not have motivations. Anders wants a revolution. Aveline wants the guard to keep order. The Viscount wants peace. The Arishok wants his book back. Isabella wants money so she can back to the sea.

I think the characters have depth.

The story however isn't paced correctly. There's not enough drive or purpose to propel the story. The inciting incident for everything is either the Chantry explosion which is at the end of the game or the finding of the idol which is at the end of Act 1. If it's the Chantry it's too late in the game, if it's the Idol then it's a weak motivation because it's magical idol that we never learn anything about and is external from the main plot (Mage freedom vs Templar security).

The story is at odds with itself. The whole personal freedom (mages) vs public security (templars) is undermined by the fact that external and unrelated events frame them. The Circle in Kirkwall is invested with blood mages and abominations because Kirkwall has a thin Veil because of the Tevinter mages way back. And the Templars are led by a mad woman because an ancient Idol made her crazy.

That's the essential flaw of the story.

That and the pacing. Act 1 has no motivation. Act 2 has nothing to do with the main story (although, it's the best act), and Act 3 is both too little too late and too much too soon. It's forced and hurried and we know nothing of the players involved.

....whew...I think that got away from me a little.

That's okay. You nailed it yet again.

I definitely agree with you on the plot organization, but when I take a step back and look at what the basic concept for the plot. I really enjoy it. (Minus the misplaced qunari settlement. I feel that was a bit hectic. Like they were trying to set up for something in the next installment that wasn't fully realized, or something.) 

I do think that some of the characters have depth, or have a great amount of potential to be deep characters (Merril was one I REAAAALLY wanted them to expand on) however, they didn't add enough.. hm.. maybe depth isn't the right word. 

I'm just going to Frankenstien the OP with random posts the three of us have made. That ought to confuse everyone, but I can't help but agree and disagree with some things at the same time. 

Dragon Age 2 is a weird beast. 

[Foolsfolly]

I want to clarify, Fenris never got his memory back. He remembers his sister vaguely, but still had no idea that he volunteered for the thing (totally saw that coming. It's directly from Wolverine and Jason Bourne). He just remember playing with his sister in a courtyard when he met her.

But I don't you have to empathize with a character's plot in order for that character to be a well written and fleshed out character. Fenris's lack of a past separates him from our experiences but he's not a bad character because he's different from us.

[Foolsfolly]

MrStorm2K wrote...

@ FoolsFolly

When I think of the story of DA2, it begins with a simple goal: Survive. It's about securing you and your family. The rest of the story is about how Hawke gets sucked in to Kirkwall.

The mage v. templar storyline is almost just a continuous side-story until the very end when you realize how serious and large-scale it actually is.

I can see that as being the intent.

It could have been pulled off better, though. GTA4 had that basic plot of Niko trying to escape his past and getting sucked into Liberty City's crime. They pulled that off, with a few flaws, but they pulled it off.

If that was their intent then the family should have stayed around until the third act. The climax needed to reinforce and give a denouncement on that. Instead they're done away with by mid-Act 2.

[GunMoth]

Foolsfolly wrote...

I want to clarify, Fenris never got his memory back. He remembers his sister vaguely, but still had no idea that he volunteered for the thing (totally saw that coming. It's directly from Wolverine and Jason Bourne). He just remember playing with his sister in a courtyard when he met her.

But I don't you have to empathize with a character's plot in order for that character to be a well written and fleshed out character. Fenris's lack of a past separates him from our experiences but he's not a bad character because he's different from us.

He does, but I'm not entirely sure if its something thats romance specific, but its in one of his "questioning beliefs" dialogs. He says something along the lines of: "I thought getting my memories back would make me happy (or content or something) but I'm not blahblahblah." I'll look for a direct quote. 

It's not that he's different that bothers me. I think its because (and I cant speak for the writers) he wanted to be understood, but he wasn't offered a chance to do so. He expresses his opinions loudly and clear. In the beginning he can't offer much because he is still suffering from amnesia, but once he declares his memory has returned, it ends abruptly. (I think this has a bit to do with how often you're allowed to speak to companions) 

Modifié par GunMoth, 23 mars 2011 - 05:06 .

[GunMoth]

Morroian wrote...

GunMoth wrote...
Elaborate a little more or use examples. I want to understand but I can't get past how terrible the characterization is. 

I think Storm2K has done a pretty good job of detailing why the characters are interesting.

There's a difference between the events that happen to a character, and how they choose to handle them. I suppose its kind of like the storyline pacing that has been brought up. There is a lot of struggling that is similar to the themes of the overall plot. It helps shed light on the mage vs. templar and the corrupt socio-political structure (or rather, how many religious fanatics live in Kirkwall). They could have opened up on that to made the setting much darker than it was. Or involve the player in the political aspect a little more (Not in a weird Fable III manage your money kind of way. Small bits of dialog I had with the Viscount opened up a point of view I felt was negelected up until his death.) Good things come in small doses, sure. But having a vague understanding of things like that makes me feel less immersed in the game than I could be. Maybe its more of a "setting" issue. 

Modifié par GunMoth, 23 mars 2011 - 05:20 .

[MrStorm2K]

GunMoth wrote...
Fenris - Amnesia. He doesn't share his past or history. It is difficult to relate to him on a personal level because of this lack of information. Even when he does get his memory back, we see little change in his character nor does he discuss memories with you. His character is important because he represents the templar side of things. He has been hurt, decieved or oppressed by mages (like many cold hearted templars are) yet it is often difficult to see his side because no first hand experiences are shared with the player character in a believable way. It would be siding with the templars a more appealing option because of a mutual understanding.

So, what'd you think of the story where he unintentionally escaped and then returned willingly after murdering those that helped him? Was that not character building? Did you want multiple stories of that type? Did the rest of the dialog with him not give you insight into what makes him tick? Why not?

Merril - Knows a LOT about the Dalish lore. She's was supposed to be a keeper. However we only hear two stories from her. We don't hear about the Dalish life often. I know the Dalish aren't a part of the plot, but she is an EXTREMELY important character in terms of understanding mages and the issues they deal with. Making a deal with a demon because of her clan's history wasn't believable on an emotional level to me because I do not understand the pressure she could be facing? Her struggle could have been explored a lot more.

Merril was scarred by a traumatic event she took responsibility for. She obsessed over it to the point where she made a deal with a demon to try to help undo it. Not to mention the addition of blood magic to her repertoire. I don't see why this is shallow or not believable. If anything, it's a wonderfully flawed character.

Anders - No comment. He just makes my head explode with stupid ideas on how his character could have been to add alignment balance. (Good vs. evil etc etc) More of Justice could have been explored. I'm kind of upset he simply disappeared or "fused" into Anders. What became of the both of them etc. Or rather, that we as the player were not there for the transformation. He was entirely too foreign. But his craziness made for a good catalyst.

Apparently, if you rivalmance him, the game hints that he gradually loses control to Vengeance over the course of the game. Eventually, he has doubts about what he has to do, but Vengeance takes over and forces him into submission.

Not sure if that makes it better or worse. But just thought I should add it.

Isabela + Varric - More information on Kirkwall. Socio-political structures etc. More stories about sailing and the stuggles topsiders deal with.

These two characters are inherently shallow; they're kids in adult bodies. However, Isabela has her arranged marriage as an excuse for her arrested development. That's why every conversation with her, if you're not in a romance, eventually turns into a sex joke. That includes her sailing stories.

Varric stays rather quiet about his past, besides that he hates dwarven culture. I don't think he's the type to dwell on the troubles of a topsider, and even if he did, he wouldn't tell you about it. See: Bianca.

I REALLY wish you could speak with Sebastian or the grand cleric about the chantry in Kirkwall more. I really enjoyed how neutral they were, which was an interesting twist.

This I agree with. I blame the fact that it's DLC.

Pretty much, characters make you sensative to the struggles of each side of the mage vs. templar issue as well as the Qunari invasion. 

All of them have an opinion and their own arguments on mage v. templar (except Varric & Isabela, for aforementioned reasons). I thought their reasons were well thought out and clearly known, and helped you form your decision later.

[Foolsfolly]

If anything, it's a wonderfully flawed character.

Merrill's the best character in the whole game. Deep, flawed, and tragic. I so want her to return in the next game.

[GunMoth]

Meh. You guys are right. It probably is just me being overly maternal or something. Maybe? I don't know. I felt that the dialog after a lot of these extremely emotionally impacting loyalty quests were brief.

I didn't (and like the rest of the game) feel like I got closure. The characters were like "YEP. This is what I gatta live with. Ah well man." and I was like "Dude I just killed your entire tribe. :| I'm more upset about this than you."

[GunMoth]

Foolsfolly wrote...

If anything, it's a wonderfully flawed character.

Merrill's the best character in the whole game. Deep, flawed, and tragic. I so want her to return in the next game.

Hah. :X I enjoyed Aveline, the Viscount and the Arishok. ? Poltical figures / people involved in politics. 

[GunMoth]

Bedtime. Bedtime. I'll check back on this tomorrow.

[MrStorm2K]

If you've conceded the characters are well done, then you concede the tools used to tell the story were good. That brings us back to where we were.

Fun stuff.

[Foolsfolly]

Aveline, the Grand Cleric, Viscount, Arishok, Merrill, Varric, and Bodhan/Sandal were my favorite characters. I liked them either because they were well written, well acted, or because they were sane in an insane world.

Most fall into all three categories.

Night, Gun.

[MrStorm2K]

Arishok, Varric, and Sebastian for me.

I still maintain that the Arishok is the most sympathetic character in DA2.

[ShakeyMac]

The Arishok struck me as the only one who could clearly see all threads in Kirkwall. The things they were attached too and what they were pulling, and who was holding them. But all he wanted was his damn book.

Which is where Isabela comes in. A carefree, happy-go-lucky piratess who unwittingly sets the stage for the Viscount's death and Hawek's ascension to Champion (which in turns fuels the fires of the Templar/Mage conflict later on down the line). I didn't find Isabela to be shallow. Arrested developmentally perhaps, but far from shallow. She's a woman who is happy and proud to be independent because she's denied the single most defining role a woman can have (I can't be the only one who got the feeling Isabela was barren, and likely made so as a result of her young marriage early on in her life).

Varric I found to be the funny straight-man. Straight in the comedic sense. He's the mirror you reflect a lot of stuff off of, while inserting his own unique take on things. I found that if Bethany dies he takes it at least as hard as Hawke and Leandra do, which was an endearing trait. It seemed like Varric had found a younger sibling in Bethany and losing her hurt him more than he thought it could. It gave the raid on Bartrands mansion a whole new quality; it was no longer just revenge for almost killing him, but it was payback for taking the Sunshine out of Varric's life. Coming from a dwarf who has known nothing but the blue sky above, I thought it quite poetic.

So I dunno, I guess what I'm trying to say is that the choices I made throughout the game resulted in pretty much everyone feeling fleshed out. Even Bethany, after I went back to a previous save and reloaded so I could play the game again but with her alive.

[MrStorm2K]

I should clarify. When I said shallow, I didn't mean they were weakly written characters. Just shallow people, like the ones you would encounter in real life.

And, even as you eloquently explained the nature of each character, you really only see them be serious and/or thoughtful at one or two points in the entire game. That was my original point.

[ShakeyMac]

I can see where you're coming from. I like to imagine that there's lots of stuff that's left out by Varric in his storytelling because it's boring or awkward. Like in the "Scarface" version of Bartrand's mansion versus the real version. Varric strikes me as the kind of guy to leave out stuff that isn't relevant to the juicier parts of a story. But I find it easy to believe that, unless explicitly stated, each person spends time with Hawke and the other's during the "downtime" of the game, i.e. the time between acts. It's easy for my mind to fill in the blanks of Varric "accidentally" bumping into Merrill during one of her many forays into Lowtown's back alleys, only for them to hop on over to the Hanged Man to have a drink and some dinner with Isabela. Or for Fenris to walk an inebriated Donnic home to Aveline's place after a game of cards. Stuff like that.

[GunMoth]

Okay. So if we're reanalyzing this whole thing, I'd say Foolsfolly has the best grasp on what made the game's narrative fall flat.

However, a small part of me feels something lacking between the characters and the situations going on. (Keep in mind I'm don't think DA2 should be more like Origins, I'm just using Origins as an example because it has a strong relationship between the characters and the narrative) For example, Alistair is the son of the King of Ferelden. We was also raised by the Arl of Redcliffe and was a templar. Because of this he was extremely integrated in the story not by the actions he made as an individual, but because of how he was born. We learn a lot about the relationships in the political system of Ferelden, and about Anora (even though I didn't crown her, I LOVED her character. She had an amazing amount of depth and almost made me forgive Logain because of her stories about him.)

A lot of the characters in Kirkwall come from outside of Kirkwall, or are refugees. The characters that WOULD have more insight into the "environment" are not your party members. They're characters like Arishok or the Viscount / Viscount's son.

I think the reason why I stress how important history, culture and political structure is because it helps flesh out Kirkwall and an environment. I feel like the reason I may have confused the characters for having no depth is because they had no relationship with Kirkwall.

Yes, there are a lot of interesting codexes about Kirkwall and its history (thin veil, slaver city for Tevinter, built by dwarves etc.) But everything that's going on feels detached from the city itself. The only thing I liked about what Kirkwall did is that it made you feel isolated from the rest of the world. It kind of shows that no matter how isolated one area is, it still impacts the ideology of other neighboring cities and countries.

Back to my point: So yes, the characters have depth. But why do they feel so disjointed or uninvolved for the exception of Anders, Aveline and your sibling? (Yes, Merrill is worried about the circle and about how lonely she feels in lowtown, but I feel that her fixation of the mirror and struggling with abandoning her tribe kind of detaches her from the storyline.)

Maybe that's why ACT III felt so rushed? We didn't have enough insight into the characters that made up the political structure. Or WHY Meredith was such a **** about the whole thing to begin with (before she was possessed).

[GunMoth]

ShakeyMac wrote...

The Arishok struck me as the only one who could clearly see all threads in Kirkwall. The things they were attached too and what they were pulling, and who was holding them. But all he wanted was his damn book.

Which is where Isabela comes in. A carefree, happy-go-lucky piratess who unwittingly sets the stage for the Viscount's death and Hawek's ascension to Champion (which in turns fuels the fires of the Templar/Mage conflict later on down the line). I didn't find Isabela to be shallow. Arrested developmentally perhaps, but far from shallow. She's a woman who is happy and proud to be independent because she's denied the single most defining role a woman can have (I can't be the only one who got the feeling Isabela was barren, and likely made so as a result of her young marriage early on in her life).

Varric I found to be the funny straight-man. Straight in the comedic sense. He's the mirror you reflect a lot of stuff off of, while inserting his own unique take on things. I found that if Bethany dies he takes it at least as hard as Hawke and Leandra do, which was an endearing trait. It seemed like Varric had found a younger sibling in Bethany and losing her hurt him more than he thought it could. It gave the raid on Bartrands mansion a whole new quality; it was no longer just revenge for almost killing him, but it was payback for taking the Sunshine out of Varric's life. Coming from a dwarf who has known nothing but the blue sky above, I thought it quite poetic.

So I dunno, I guess what I'm trying to say is that the choices I made throughout the game resulted in pretty much everyone feeling fleshed out. Even Bethany, after I went back to a previous save and reloaded so I could play the game again but with her alive.

All of the Neutral characters like the Arishok, Grand Cleric, Viscount, Isabela and Varric were my favorites. I think it was partially because I didn't feel they offered enough true neutral decisions. Its one reason why I dislike the Mass Effect karama system, and by the end of the game I had to choose between two sides. Why couldn't you simply fight in the name of the chantry for peace between the two sides? Augh. augh. augh. 

Anyway, I think that both Storm 2k and Foolsfolly were right in assuming I meant that there were amazing characters, but that the narrative destroyed them. 

[MortalEngines]

GunMoth wrote...
Back to my point: So yes, the characters have depth. But why do they feel so disjointed or uninvolved for the exception of Anders, Aveline and your sibling? (Yes, Merrill is worried about the circle and about how lonely she feels in lowtown, but I feel that her fixation of the mirror and struggling with abandoning her tribe kind of detaches her from the storyline.)

Just a quick point, you must remember that some characters are optional and are not actually required to be in your party, this means that yes, sometimes they don't feel quite intergal to the storyline as they could be. But to some extent, they can't be, because if they were then they would cease to be truly optional characters. Just like Leliana, Sten and Wynne don't really feel tied to the plotline that much (Other than her vision, Leliana is not really intergated the plot, just like Merrill).

Modifié par MortalEngines, 23 mars 2011 - 07:30 .

[GunMoth]

ZombiePowered wrote...

GunMoth wrote...

It didn't really feel like a "choose your own" adventure book. Even though in Origins they choose to go with a montage of texts to wrap up the ending and all of your choices, they were all written brilliantly and let my imagination wander.

This works because we were mostly done with Ferelden. The events/consequences of the Warden's actions are known and can be stated as canon. The consequences of Hawke's actions haven't even begun to show their full force yet. The reason that there is no closure in the ending for DA2 is because things aren't over. Things have barely begun. All we've seen in DA2 are the pieces being set up. Of course there is no conclusion on what happened to the mages; that is story to be shown, not expositioned at us. And the Arishok very clearly let us know that they would be back. And let's not even get started on why the Grey Wardens want to find the primevil thaig: did anyone find the whole idea of the idol "singing" far to familiar to the song the Awakening's Mother and her ilk missed so dearly? To end DA2, which is far more about Hawke and his rise to power, with a wall of text simply wouldn't have done him justice.

In short, the game was executed correctly. Perhaps not what some people wanted (i.e., it wasn't Origins with a new face and better graphics), but it the story was shown exactly how it should have been, and any lack of closure at the end is because things aren't over. It was the ending of the beginning of Hawke's legend. Varric ends it by saying "A legend was born." Everything after that is teaser, a taste of things to come. And it worked. It made me really thirsty.

Haha, I think I brought this up elsewhere, but Justice says that in the real world, Lyrium sings and that only beings from the Fade can hear it. However, Darkspawn can hear it. They aren't from the fade, but their curse has something to do with the fade, whether or not it is related to the maker. Also, another funny connection is that the deeper into the earth you go, the older Dwarven Thaigs are. Meaning that they literally came from inside of the earth (did not come from a civilization topside and eventually burrowed downward). The deeper you go, the more darkspawn, and the more crazy lyrium artifacts you can find. 

[GunMoth]

MortalEngines wrote...

GunMoth wrote...
Back to my point: So yes, the characters have depth. But why do they feel so disjointed or uninvolved for the exception of Anders, Aveline and your sibling? (Yes, Merrill is worried about the circle and about how lonely she feels in lowtown, but I feel that her fixation of the mirror and struggling with abandoning her tribe kind of detaches her from the storyline.)

Just a quick point, you must remember that some characters are optional and are not actually required to be in your party, this means that yes, sometimes they don't feel quite intergal to the storyline as they could be. But to some extent, they can't be, because if they were then they would cease to be truly optional characters. Just like Leliana, Sten and Wynne don't really feel tied to the plotline that much (Other than her vision, Leliana is not really intergated the plot, just like Merrill).

Good point. Perhaps thats why they made Leliana, Zev, Wynne and Sten so focused on culture and personal history. It gave insight on the setting of Thedas. 

But I think that was my issue with the optional characters, they didn't offer me that kind of insight. They were deep, flawed, but disjointed from the plot and the world. 

[Adynata]

There was a disjointedness in the overall story arc since you come into the game unsure of what the plot tension is. And it is troubling that you don't meet the two end-game antagonists until nearly the end. Even then, they reveal little about themselves with few dialogue options for you to pry into, and you are forced to make a dramatic choice about the direction of the conflict before you truly feel prepared to make such a decision. I have trouble pinning down a climax since I think they tried to place a climax at the end of each act, but these only play small parts in the REAL climax that will define Kirkwall: the mage revolt. I didn't even realize there was talk of revolution until the chantry blew (I guess Anders made his point then). So, I'd argue that the climax is meant to be that precise moment (and it is rather climactic, especially with Sebastian there). However, the denoument is quick and does not lead to a resolution. The OP makes a good point about the cliffhanger here vs. Mass Effect 2. Had Shepard just walked off of the ship and then the credits ran, I'd also have the feeling that it didn't truly end.

Good characters do not make a good story, as someone in the thread had suggested. And they are good characters, with interesting background stories but limited means of exploration. I should have the option to ask them more questions: as a an audience and a player in the center of the action, I feel muted in my ability to move the story forward without asking the questions I need answered. I don't think it would've been too much to be able to have a conversation with the person living in your house about the past 3 years in order to actually give the sense that 3 years had passed. These jumps in time were not handled as well as I have seen them done in books or movies.

My boyfriend agrees that the game should've been called Dragon Age: Kirkwall. It has little to do with the Age of Dragons, nothing to do with Wardens or darkspawn, and leaves you feeling like the kind of person who spends her whole life in a one-horse town. Did I really just let 3 years go by without an apology from Fenris? Why am I hanging around this city after my whole family is gone, my friends barely visit b/c their only priority is their personal problem, and the templars want my head on a stake?

That's why I find it hard to believe Hawke would even leave at the end, even if (s)he did help Anders. She's done worse, and better, and everyone always seems to forgive her. Once Meredith is dead, who's going to stop Hawke from taking over?

I'm blaming Varric for being a bad story teller.