85 réponses à ce sujet

[NeroSparda]

The Angry One wrote...

Well the main difference is

Origins: "The Archdemon is slain! The leader of Ferelden is decided. The story that began here, ended here."
DA2: "The great big war has begun! Both main characters are mysteriously absent! Find out the exciting conclusion in DA3!"

Well the first main character's disappearance is rather obivous to those that chose to go with Morrigan... And you forgot about the DLCs.

[The Angry One]

Well let's say it's all about Hawke, it doesn't conclude that either. Basically Hawke builds themself up, then everything crashes down around them and they vanish - we don't see the ultimate ending to Hawke's tale which is why I call it a sequel hook.

Now, if it had been Hawke self-framing their story and not Varric I would've considered that more satisfying.

[ToJKa1]

Tamahome560 wrote...

Since when was Dragon Age meant to be a trilogy?

Since DA2 ended with a beginning of another story.

Modifié par ToJKa1, 23 mars 2011 - 11:02 .

[The Angry One]

NeroSparda wrote...

Well the first main character's disappearance is rather obivous to those that chose to go with Morrigan...

And not so obvious to those of us that didn't..

And you forgot about the DLCs.

Let's say they finish the story through DLC (which I find unlikely) that's still a form of sequel hooking, only with DLC instead of an actual sequel.
Either way it's "pay more money to see the end, sucker".

[Miashi]

I just have a general impression that DA:2 "endings" ended the very same way than Neverwinter Nights 2 finished (mind you, Bioware didn't make NWN2). Nevertheless, I had the same feelings when I ended DA:2 than when I ended NWN2: anger and dissapointment.

To those who didn't play NWN2, well, I don't want to give out spoilers, but it's not far from the way DA:2 ended.

This said, Mask of the Betrayer was a brilliant sequel. Can only hope DA:3 returns to its DA:O roots.

Modifié par Miashi, 23 mars 2011 - 11:06 .

[Lithuasil]

Miashi wrote...

I just have a general impression that DA:2 "endings" ended the very same way than Neverwinter Nights 2 finished (mind you, Bioware didn't make NWN2). Nevertheless, I had the same feelings when I ended DA:2 than when I ended NWN2: anger and dissapointment..

Why do you assume that a drama leaving you with a heavy cold stone in your gut afterwards is a bad thing? It's kind of the point.

[Shorinjikan]

kyles3 wrote...

Worked for Star Wars.

In V there is an actual 'post game sequence', where the major characters say their goodbyes, think about their choices, (and nurse their phantom limb pain) and declare the next course of action.  DAO did this, DA2 does not.

[ziloe]

Tamahome560 wrote...

Also anyone who expected multiple endings didn't listen to what the devs and trailers have been saying all the time since the game was announced. The outcome of the story was already set: Chantry has fallen to pieces and the world is at the brink of war. Your role in the game was to decide what kind of person was the Champion and what was the reasoning behind the choices he made which lead to the events at present.

In a German interview, one question was how many endings and the response was, "Twelve."

[DarkSpiral]

kyles3 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Well the main difference is

Origins: "The Archdemon is slain! The leader of Ferelden is decided. The story that began here, ended here."
DA2: "The great big war has begun! Both main characters are mysteriously absent! Find out the exciting conclusion in DA3!"

Worked for Star Wars.

Kudos to you, sir.  Granted, Bioware has explicitly stated the Dragon Age series is not being handled as a series based around a single character, but I salute you nonetheless.

[ziloe]

Lithuasil wrote...

ziloe wrote...

None of that actually matters though. You get one little scene, in comparison to the epilogue that takes the same route no matter what and adds or takes away a few words.

Actually, since route and encounters change in DA2 based on your decision... it kind of matters more. Actually changing a level based on your decisions is more non-linearity then Origins had at any point. 

The routes were just backwards. You still made the same decision in the end, it didn't matter. No matter what, you still killed both Templar and Mage alike. The bosses were the same and the ending was the same. Boooring! 

[Lithuasil]

ziloe wrote...

Lithuasil wrote...

ziloe wrote...

None of that actually matters though. You get one little scene, in comparison to the epilogue that takes the same route no matter what and adds or takes away a few words.

Actually, since route and encounters change in DA2 based on your decision... it kind of matters more. Actually changing a level based on your decisions is more non-linearity then Origins had at any point. 

The routes were just backwards. You still made the same decision in the end, it didn't matter. No matter what, you still killed both Templar and Mage alike. The bosses were the same and the ending was the same. Boooring! 

You know like no matter what decisions you made, you fight through the exact same denerim and fight the exact same archdemon?

[Miashi]

Lithuasil wrote...
Why do you assume that a drama leaving you with a heavy cold stone in your gut afterwards is a bad thing? It's kind of the point.

Sorry if I wasn't clear, but by anger I meant this: Playing 50 hours of a game to figure out that the ending is exactly the same than the way the game starts: no one knows where hawke is, and something bad happened.

It's not the kind of "happy" anger I had, when, let's say, they released the first preview of Mass Effect 2 showing that Shepard was dead.

[Edge2177]

The Angry One wrote...

I'm just not fond of trilogy
syndrome myself, I always hate the middle story existing solely to be
the hook for the finale.

This happened once before. - It was called Shadows of Amn.

You know what came next? Throne of Bhaal.

Modifié par Edge2177, 23 mars 2011 - 11:53 .

[Lithuasil]

Miashi wrote...

Sorry if I wasn't clear, but by anger I meant this: Playing 50 hours of a game to figure out that the ending is exactly the same than the way the game starts: no one knows where hawke is, and something bad happened.

It's not the kind of "happy" anger I had, when, let's say, they released the first preview of Mass Effect 2 showing that Shepard was dead.

Admittedly, the framed narrative isn't exactly the best Idea this game had - and I'd have implemented a reason for hawke to be unavailable (there were several great opportunities for that). But I didn't mind so much. I do somewhat understand where you're coming from though.

[ziloe]

Lithuasil wrote...

ziloe wrote...

Lithuasil wrote...

ziloe wrote...

None of that actually matters though. You get one little scene, in comparison to the epilogue that takes the same route no matter what and adds or takes away a few words.

Actually, since route and encounters change in DA2 based on your decision... it kind of matters more. Actually changing a level based on your decisions is more non-linearity then Origins had at any point. 

The routes were just backwards. You still made the same decision in the end, it didn't matter. No matter what, you still killed both Templar and Mage alike. The bosses were the same and the ending was the same. Boooring! 

You know like no matter what decisions you made, you fight through the exact same denerim and fight the exact same archdemon?

But... *GASP!* every other choice you made in the Origins game reflects in the ending and actually means something. Who would have thought! 

[Lithuasil]

ziloe wrote...
But... *GASP!* every other choice you made in the Origins game reflects in the ending and actually means something. Who would have thought! 

You mean the choices you make in a dialogue, after completing the exact same levels, and that don't reflect upon gameplay *at all* aside from what pokemon you can bring to the final battle. Yeah, guess those really mattered.

[ziloe]

Lithuasil wrote...

Miashi wrote...

Sorry if I wasn't clear, but by anger I meant this: Playing 50 hours of a game to figure out that the ending is exactly the same than the way the game starts: no one knows where hawke is, and something bad happened.

It's not the kind of "happy" anger I had, when, let's say, they released the first preview of Mass Effect 2 showing that Shepard was dead.

Admittedly, the framed narrative isn't exactly the best Idea this game had - and I'd have implemented a reason for hawke to be unavailable (there were several great opportunities for that). But I didn't mind so much. I do somewhat understand where you're coming from though.

The Frame Narrative was AWFUL! It would have been cool if it actually happened more than maybe four or five times and was actually implemented throughout the story like they boasted. 

[ziloe]

Lithuasil wrote...

ziloe wrote...
But... *GASP!* every other choice you made in the Origins game reflects in the ending and actually means something. Who would have thought! 

You mean the choices you make in a dialogue, after completing the exact same levels, and that don't reflect upon gameplay *at all* aside from what pokemon you can bring to the final battle. Yeah, guess those really mattered.

I was never talking about the gameplay. I was talking about the linear railroaded story that made your choices mean nothing because it all happened anyway. I skipped Anders Quest and STILL, he somehow got the ingredients for the bomb and he STILL got into the Chantry covertly. Nothing I did mattered! 

[Kinaori]

You know it's funny... I felt like my choices
didn't matter in DA2 either, but you're right in that DA:O the
variations were pretty much in the same place as DA2. But it still
*felt* like DA2 was more lockstep. I've been thinking about it and I
still can't really figure out *why*.

ziloe wrote...

I was never talking about the gameplay. I was talking about the linear
railroaded story that made your choices mean nothing because it all
happened anyway. I skipped Anders Quest and STILL, he somehow got the
ingredients for the bomb and he STILL got into the Chantry covertly.
Nothing I did mattered!

That's a good example.

Modifié par Kinaori, 24 mars 2011 - 12:02 .

[Statulos]

The Angry One wrote...

I'm just not fond of trilogy syndrome myself, I always hate the middle story existing solely to be the hook for the finale.

That is what makes The Ring of the Nibelung so awesome! 

[Lithuasil]

Kinaori wrote...

You know it's funny... I felt like my choices didn't matter in DA2 either, but you're right in that DA:O the variations were pretty much in the same place as DA2. But it still *felt* like DA2 was more lockstep. I've been thinking about it and I still can't really figure out *why*.

In neither game your choices mattered. The essential difference is - Origins *told* you your choices would matter, where as DA2 provided you with a valid reason to *why* your decisions doesn't matter. Unlike the warden, who's railroaded by the writers, Hawke's hand is forced by circumstance.

[ziloe]

Lithuasil wrote...

Kinaori wrote...

You know it's funny... I felt like my choices didn't matter in DA2 either, but you're right in that DA:O the variations were pretty much in the same place as DA2. But it still *felt* like DA2 was more lockstep. I've been thinking about it and I still can't really figure out *why*.

In neither game your choices mattered. The essential difference is - Origins *told* you your choices would matter, where as DA2 provided you with a valid reason to *why* your decisions doesn't matter. Unlike the warden, who's railroaded by the writers, Hawke's hand is forced by circumstance.

Did you actually play Origins? There's several choices that affect the world, who you side with, who you kill, who you make King or Queen, do you sacrifice yourself for the greater good? So many things and they all do something! 

Unlike DA:2 that railroads you into the same circumstance, just from a different angle. 

[Lithuasil]

ziloe wrote...

Did you actually play Origins? There's several choices that affect the world, who you side with, who you kill, who you make King or Queen, do you sacrifice yourself for the greater good? So many things and they all do something! 

Unlike DA:2 that railroads you into the same circumstance, just from a different angle. 

Because who rules the game world of Origins in the end is a mayor difference, but who rules Kirkwall isn't? How the conflict between the dalish and their wolfs get resolved matters, but how the conflict between the Qunari and the free marches is resolved does not? If morrigan and her baby are set loose matters, if Anders and Justice are let loose doesn't?
Origins *told* you "Oh mighty hero, you solved this level, now decide which side you pick, so we can all pretend it matters, since you're not coming back here, anyway". You fell for it. 

[DarkSpiral]

ziloe wrote...

The routes were just backwards. You still made the same decision in the end, it didn't matter. No matter what, you still killed both Templar and Mage alike. The bosses were the same and the ending was the same. Boooring! 

That description can be properly applied to DA:O as well.  Oh, and every RPG (except Deus Ex) ever made.  So I fail to see your point.  Unless your point is that DA2 isn't Deus Ex? <_<

[TheBlackBaron]

Miashi wrote...

I just have a general impression that DA:2 "endings" ended the very same way than Neverwinter Nights 2 finished (mind you, Bioware didn't make NWN2). Nevertheless, I had the same feelings when I ended DA:2 than when I ended NWN2: anger and dissapointment.

To those who didn't play NWN2, well, I don't want to give out spoilers, but it's not far from the way DA:2 ended.

Not sure I'd go that far. Both endings are pretty bad, but DA2's makes it clear that everybody that was still alive by the end survives and strongly implies that its story will continue in a quest for more cash. 

Wheras NWN2 had one of the most literal examples of Rocks Fall Everyone Dies I've ever seen. 

This said, Mask of the Betrayer was a brilliant sequel. Can only hope DA:3 returns to its DA:O roots.

MotB was an xpack, and while I'm hoping beyond hoping DA2 gets something of the caliber of it or Throne of Baal...I'm terribly worried we're instead going to get more sub-par DLC. If the DA team goes that route they at least need to phone Edmonton (or is it Montreal? I can never remember) and ask for pointers on how to create DLC of the quality that Shadow Broker had). 

Modifié par TheBlackBaron, 24 mars 2011 - 12:39 .