85 réponses à ce sujet

[ziloe]

Lithuasil wrote...

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. 

Yes, who rules Ferelden does make a difference to their overall story and who rules the Dwarves also makes a difference to their economy. I won't even get into the Dalish, because we both should already know that one.

Dealing with the Qunari on the other hand in DA:2 is the same, except alternatively, you can either fight the Arishok, not fight the Arishok, or fight him as a group. There is no way to stop the slaughter before it starts. 

If Anders died in Awakening, he is still forced in your party for DA:2 cannon purposes and the ending is still forced, because they didn't bother with any other epic alternatives. It's that simple.

And if that still doesn't satisfy you, just look at the achievement list. There is barely anything there! 

[Lithuasil]

ziloe wrote...

Yes, who rules Ferelden does make a difference to their overall story and who rules the Dwarves also makes a difference to their economy. I won't even get into the Dalish, because we both should already know that one.

Dealing with the Qunari on the other hand in DA:2 is the same, except alternatively, you can either fight the Arishok, not fight the Arishok, or fight him as a group. There is no way to stop the slaughter before it starts. 

If Anders died in Awakening, he is still forced in your party for DA:2 cannon purposes and the ending is still forced, because they didn't bother with any other epic alternatives. It's that simple.

And if that still doesn't satisfy you, just look at the achievement list. There is barely anything there! 

How do you regard deciding who rules ferelden a decision but not deciding who rules Kirkwall? How is there "hardly a difference" between sending the Qunari back home peacefully, with their book, and selling the book to some tevinter magister, slaughtering the Qunari in the city to the man?
You not liking it does not make the ending any more or less forced. But then of course - achievements. Clearly the narrative value of a story should be judged by how much gamerscore you get.

[nicodeemus327]

Lithuasil wrote...

ziloe wrote...

Yes, who rules Ferelden does make a difference to their overall story and who rules the Dwarves also makes a difference to their economy. I won't even get into the Dalish, because we both should already know that one.

Dealing with the Qunari on the other hand in DA:2 is the same, except alternatively, you can either fight the Arishok, not fight the Arishok, or fight him as a group. There is no way to stop the slaughter before it starts. 

If Anders died in Awakening, he is still forced in your party for DA:2 cannon purposes and the ending is still forced, because they didn't bother with any other epic alternatives. It's that simple.

And if that still doesn't satisfy you, just look at the achievement list. There is barely anything there! 

How do you regard deciding who rules ferelden a decision but not deciding who rules Kirkwall? How is there "hardly a difference" between sending the Qunari back home peacefully, with their book, and selling the book to some tevinter magister, slaughtering the Qunari in the city to the man?
You not liking it does not make the ending any more or less forced. But then of course - achievements. Clearly the narrative value of a story should be judged by how much gamerscore you get.

You bring up some goods points. Since DAO was the first of its kind many people bought into their illusion of choice. We've figured out the formula for DA2.

[ziloe]

Lithuasil wrote...

ziloe wrote...

Yes, who rules Ferelden does make a difference to their overall story and who rules the Dwarves also makes a difference to their economy. I won't even get into the Dalish, because we both should already know that one.

Dealing with the Qunari on the other hand in DA:2 is the same, except alternatively, you can either fight the Arishok, not fight the Arishok, or fight him as a group. There is no way to stop the slaughter before it starts. 

If Anders died in Awakening, he is still forced in your party for DA:2 cannon purposes and the ending is still forced, because they didn't bother with any other epic alternatives. It's that simple.

And if that still doesn't satisfy you, just look at the achievement list. There is barely anything there! 

How do you regard deciding who rules ferelden a decision but not deciding who rules Kirkwall? How is there "hardly a difference" between sending the Qunari back home peacefully, with their book, and selling the book to some tevinter magister, slaughtering the Qunari in the city to the man?
You not liking it does not make the ending any more or less forced. But then of course - achievements. Clearly the narrative value of a story should be judged by how much gamerscore you get.

Because you make that choice. Where as in DA:2, it's just kinda thrown at you, depending on who you side with at the end.

As for the Qunari, they still attack the city no matter what you do. 

It's obviously pointless talking to you, because you've misinterpreted even my reference to the achievements example. I was referring to the fact that it's very limited, unlike Origins where there was a huge amount just based on your choices alone. 

Modifié par ziloe, 24 mars 2011 - 01:11 .

[Miashi]

TheBlackBaron wrote...

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. 

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). 

The rock falls part is true if you played a good character, but it leaves you the cliffhanger style "the hero was never to be found again" while the evil ending you do some bad stuff, then dissapear as well.

Shadow Broker was very well done

Modifié par Miashi, 24 mars 2011 - 01:18 .

[Lithuasil]

ziloe wrote...
Because you make that choice. Where as in DA:2, it's just kinda thrown at you, depending on who you side with at the end.

As for the Qunari, they still attack the city no matter what you do. 

It's obviously pointless talking to you, because you've misinterpreted even my reference to the achievements example. I was referring to the fact that it's very limited, unlike Origins where there was a huge amount just based on your choices alone. 

I read the codex, so I somewhat saw it coming, and while the Qunari attack the city no matter what you do (like the werewolfs do the dalish, like the abominations do the circle, like...) whether they leave peacefully, with their book and their Arishok, or if everyone gets killed, is a pretty big difference by my book.

Your choices in Origins didn't matter. at all. They just *told* you, that they mattered. They made you run a level, and at the end of the level you get to pick a side, and fix all the problems via blunt force. After that, you never come back, and never see the actual consequences of your decision. That's not choice, that's railroading sloppily covered up.

[ziloe]

Lithuasil wrote...

ziloe wrote...
Because you make that choice. Where as in DA:2, it's just kinda thrown at you, depending on who you side with at the end.

As for the Qunari, they still attack the city no matter what you do. 

It's obviously pointless talking to you, because you've misinterpreted even my reference to the achievements example. I was referring to the fact that it's very limited, unlike Origins where there was a huge amount just based on your choices alone. 

I read the codex, so I somewhat saw it coming, and while the Qunari attack the city no matter what you do (like the werewolfs do the dalish, like the abominations do the circle, like...) whether they leave peacefully, with their book and their Arishok, or if everyone gets killed, is a pretty big difference by my book.

Your choices in Origins didn't matter. at all. They just *told* you, that they mattered. They made you run a level, and at the end of the level you get to pick a side, and fix all the problems via blunt force. After that, you never come back, and never see the actual consequences of your decision. That's not choice, that's railroading sloppily covered up.

You read a codex, so you saw it coming? Are you listening to yourself?! The werewolves in Origins were already attacking them when you entered the place. When you get out into Lothering, there are already rumours of what's happening in the Circle. That isn't stuff that you were intended to stop, it's called plot! You go there to fix the problem and move on. You aren't forced to go a particular direction and even if it were masked, it did it a lot less obviously.

As for the Qunari, you're telling me a city getting ransacked, compared to a bunch of people getting killed isn't as big of a deal? It's the whole ******* city! It's all of the people!

As for the ending of Origins, did you not READ the events text? It notes what you did and what happened. It was very clear, in comparison to a bland and railroaded ending. I don't care if you fight the Archedemon in Origins, at least there, your choices mattered and affected the world, like your sacrifice, etc. 

[Lithuasil]

ziloe wrote...

You read a codex, so you saw it coming? Are you listening to yourself?! The werewolves in Origins were already attacking them when you entered the place. When you get out into Lothering, there are already rumours of what's happening in the Circle. That isn't stuff that you were intended to stop, it's called plot! You go there to fix the problem and move on. You aren't forced to go a particular direction and even if it were masked, it did it a lot less obviously.

As for the Qunari, you're telling me a city getting ransacked, compared to a bunch of people getting killed isn't as big of a deal? It's the whole ******* city! It's all of the people!

As for the ending of Origins, did you not READ the events text? It notes what you did and what happened. It was very clear, in comparison to a bland and railroaded ending. I don't care if you fight the Archedemon in Origins, at least there, your choices mattered and affected the world, like your sacrifice, etc. 

Given the achievement for becoming Viscount and the codey entries about the political situation in Kirkwall, it doesn't take my genius to know what course of action would get you the title.
Other then that, I'll just leave now, and wish you well in that funny little world of yours, where Origins was a non-linear game without railroading and your choices changed anything noticeable.

[ziloe]

Lithuasil wrote...

ziloe wrote...

You read a codex, so you saw it coming? Are you listening to yourself?! The werewolves in Origins were already attacking them when you entered the place. When you get out into Lothering, there are already rumours of what's happening in the Circle. That isn't stuff that you were intended to stop, it's called plot! You go there to fix the problem and move on. You aren't forced to go a particular direction and even if it were masked, it did it a lot less obviously.

As for the Qunari, you're telling me a city getting ransacked, compared to a bunch of people getting killed isn't as big of a deal? It's the whole ******* city! It's all of the people!

As for the ending of Origins, did you not READ the events text? It notes what you did and what happened. It was very clear, in comparison to a bland and railroaded ending. I don't care if you fight the Archedemon in Origins, at least there, your choices mattered and affected the world, like your sacrifice, etc. 

Given the achievement for becoming Viscount and the codey entries about the political situation in Kirkwall, it doesn't take my genius to know what course of action would get you the title.
Other then that, I'll just leave now, and wish you well in that funny little world of yours, where Origins was a non-linear game without railroading and your choices changed anything noticeable.

Lol, I never said Origins didn't at any point, but at least it wasn't blatantly obvious. 

Modifié par ziloe, 24 mars 2011 - 07:06 .

[Kelgair]

I get the sense that the OP wants the epilogue to be more than Varric going over the last three years since Meredith and Orsino were killed and Anders starts the mage rebellion. Can't really have the meta-epilogues like "Bhelen proved himself to be a reformer, etc etc" when it's one dwarf going over what he's seen/heard from the Champion.

Ending wise I can think of at least 6 different flags that can happen right after Anders blows up the Chantry. Not including the long term effects of Act 2.

Modifié par Kelgair, 24 mars 2011 - 09:48 .

[Vhaius]

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.

I loled.

[sten_super]

OP, are you seriously suggesting that the choices in DAO carried more weight because they were mentioned in the epilogue? Because that's what it seems. We know that Bioware (necessarily) pays absolutely no heed to the epilogues (or even, in some cases, to in-game events from DAO).

In the most literal sense, your decisions in DAO effected which companions you had with you at the end, which allies you had to call on (elves vs werewolves, dwarves vs golems, mages vs templars), and your legacy (did you die, stay and help the monarch, return to Orzammer, etc.). In DA2, it effects the companions you have with you at the end, the quests that you have available to you at some point (or so I believe?) and your legacy (are you viscount or a fleeing hero). That seems pretty similar to me.

[ziloe]

sten_super wrote...

OP, are you seriously suggesting that the choices in DAO carried more weight because they were mentioned in the epilogue? Because that's what it seems. We know that Bioware (necessarily) pays absolutely no heed to the epilogues (or even, in some cases, to in-game events from DAO).

In the most literal sense, your decisions in DAO effected which companions you had with you at the end, which allies you had to call on (elves vs werewolves, dwarves vs golems, mages vs templars), and your legacy (did you die, stay and help the monarch, return to Orzammer, etc.). In DA2, it effects the companions you have with you at the end, the quests that you have available to you at some point (or so I believe?) and your legacy (are you viscount or a fleeing hero). That seems pretty similar to me.

No, not just because they were mentioned in the epilogue. There were plenty more instances, like who you let live, who you gave up on, etc. Throughout DA:2, those choices barely held any weight. For instance, that dwarf who tries to blackmail you if you got his help for the deep roads, if you deny him, it doesn't really matter because he changes his mind about doing it that way and tries to kill you, thus ending any complications the story might have had. Again, I'll also mention Anders, like if he died in Awakening and you didn't pick up Justice, Anders is still both of them in DA:2 because the plot is forced on you and your choices don't really reflect any real meaning. 

[Lithuasil]

ziloe wrote...

Lol, I never said Origins didn't at any point, but at least it wasn't blatantly obvious. 

*sigh* The only difference is, that in Origins, they tell you everything you did mattered, so you get to feel like the hero.

Also, for the sake of being a smartass alone - If you take offense at Anders being alive - the choice you made that killed him, was made in Awakenings. So if anything, it was a choice in Awakenings that doesn't matter, whereas for all we know, the decision to murder knife Anders in DA2 holds all the weight that's implied.
Logic is a ****, ain't it?

[ziloe]

Lithuasil wrote...

ziloe wrote...

Lol, I never said Origins didn't at any point, but at least it wasn't blatantly obvious. 

*sigh* The only difference is, that in Origins, they tell you everything you did mattered, so you get to feel like the hero.

Also, for the sake of being a smartass alone - If you take offense at Anders being alive - the choice you made that killed him, was made in Awakenings. So if anything, it was a choice in Awakenings that doesn't matter, whereas for all we know, the decision to murder knife Anders in DA2 holds all the weight that's implied.
Logic is a ****, ain't it?

I'm not even talking about just the epilogue. Your choices in Origins feel like they've mattered, because they actually hold some value throughout the game, instead of being one mini cutscene alternative, like in my previous example.

As for Anders, not really. They are supposed to be transferring your data. Not cannon. But even at the end of DA:2, Anders totally isn't dead, even if you knife him. He never closes his eyes. Justice took over.

[Lithuasil]

ziloe wrote...

I'm not even talking about just the epilogue. Your choices in Origins feel like they've mattered, because they actually hold some value throughout the game, instead of being one mini cutscene alternative, like in my previous example.

Except for when the origins decisions are just that - a glorified "pick your reward" in cutscene. Which is always.

[Everwarden]

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.

It worked for Star Wars because Empire Strikes Back was awesome. DA2 is not awesome. DA2 is, if I'm being charitable, on the lower end of 'okay'. So the obvious sequel hook just didn't work. 

[ziloe]

Lithuasil wrote...

ziloe wrote...

I'm not even talking about just the epilogue. Your choices in Origins feel like they've mattered, because they actually hold some value throughout the game, instead of being one mini cutscene alternative, like in my previous example.

Except for when the origins decisions are just that - a glorified "pick your reward" in cutscene. Which is always.

It's sad that you can bash Origins, but can't even recognize the flaws in this game.

And you call yourself a writer. 

[jma2286]

Here is the deal: Mass Effect 2 presented a model of storytelling that BioWare and EA tried and saw that it worked. You tell most of the story but leave the bridge between the current and next game to DLC, making sure that the important DLC is damn good (LotSB and Arrival, don't tell me a Reaper related DLC with Admiral Hackett isn't going to kick ass)

Dragon Age 2 is straight up awesome no question. Every character you recruit is compelling and has tragic flaws that make them more believable the more you get to know them. They also did not make the mistake of Origins in creating a main character that can be way too much at once and not personal enough in communication. Hawke is Hawke, not one of six different other characters. While it is cool to have that much possibility in the story, as we saw with Origins carryover to DA2, it makes a mess in continuity.

Hawke is going to be a lot easier to bring into DA3 than the Warden's story. For continuity's sake that's why BioWare took the most popular Warden stories and made them the import characters. Cousland + Morrigan, interestingly, is the Hero of Ferelden import. Hawke, on the other hand, is still very important but more clearly defined. A "railroaded" story at least has a coherence and method to it, which makes continuing to tell the story better because you know exactly who she/he is.

DA:O was a great story and the variety of possible main characters made it richer in that game but in the long term it's better to have main characters like Hawke than seven different main characters that cannot be mentioned with every turn (any city elf Warden references? casteless dwarf?)

[Lithuasil]

ziloe wrote...
It's sad that you can bash Origins, but can't even recognize the flaws in this game.

And you call yourself a writer. 

Ah, personal Insult - still the second highest form intellectual debate, right behind flinging poo.

I recognize full well the weaknesses that DA2 has, it's just that my face isn't deep enough in the nostalgia bucket to hate the game for things that it did *better* then all it's predecessors, for virtually no reason other then that change is scary.

[ziloe]

jma2286 wrote...

Here is the deal: Mass Effect 2 presented a model of storytelling that BioWare and EA tried and saw that it worked. You tell most of the story but leave the bridge between the current and next game to DLC, making sure that the important DLC is damn good (LotSB and Arrival, don't tell me a Reaper related DLC with Admiral Hackett isn't going to kick ass)

Dragon Age 2 is straight up awesome no question. Every character you recruit is compelling and has tragic flaws that make them more believable the more you get to know them. They also did not make the mistake of Origins in creating a main character that can be way too much at once and not personal enough in communication. Hawke is Hawke, not one of six different other characters. While it is cool to have that much possibility in the story, as we saw with Origins carryover to DA2, it makes a mess in continuity.

Hawke is going to be a lot easier to bring into DA3 than the Warden's story. For continuity's sake that's why BioWare took the most popular Warden stories and made them the import characters. Cousland + Morrigan, interestingly, is the Hero of Ferelden import. Hawke, on the other hand, is still very important but more clearly defined. A "railroaded" story at least has a coherence and method to it, which makes continuing to tell the story better because you know exactly who she/he is.

DA:O was a great story and the variety of possible main characters made it richer in that game but in the long term it's better to have main characters like Hawke than seven different main characters that cannot be mentioned with every turn (any city elf Warden references? casteless dwarf?)

My response to your thinking this is awesome is this:

Story:

I felt like this game was so linear, like when I could face the Arishok, no matter what, I would have to fight him. The only difference was in how, alone or with friends. There was no way to avoid a fight all together, no matter how much I played the peace keeper.

You guys claimed a frame narrative and that barely even happened. Even Prince of Persia did a better job, including when the "Game Over" happened and he went all out to say, "No! No! No! That isn't right..." etc.
I was totally looking forward to this game and all these promises you made of improvements and though some of them were admirable and I enjoyed the game, I couldn't help but see too many parallels to the Mass Effect series. You guys kept going on about the Qun being of one mind and I was like, "God, what are they, the Geth?"

Gameplay:

When it comes to the levels, I was fine at first with a bit of the repetition, but my gawd, you used the warehouse build for the sewers? C'mon! Where's the dirty running water and the cool dark atmosphere, like in games such as The Witcher? I understand its a long game, but I thought Mass Effect 1 learned from this mistake already, so why are you guys making the same mistake over again? If you guys could learn from the Mass Effect conversation wheel, you could take some other pointers as well to learn from when it comes to the complaints. 

Despite all that, you also claimed the world would change and grow over the years and it didn't. A couple places were removed like the Qunari base, some level maps forced the same map, but didn't allow you access to certain areas because you were visiting "another" place, despite it being the same. 


Origins and Graphics:

As for Hawke, he never once needed to be the role of a human. You could have had options of your origin continuing and like in Origins, it would have barely affected anything if you played an Elf or a Dwarf, albeit a few minor comments. It's not like you'd need a new voice actor either, it could have remained the same and I doubt it would have bothered anyone to do so.

I have a high end computer and even with its specs, I still saw Origins style. Even the hair options were barely there, everything was the same, minus a few tweeks. 

The Ending:

I posted this in my other thread, though I believe it's appropriate enough for here too. After finding out about what Anders does and playing through that last bit over again, which mind you I expected more after, since this was ONLY the SEVENTH YEAR and Bioware stated TEN! I decided to go through my saves again and this time deny helping Anders enter the chantry covertly. 
Then, right after that, I went directly to the chantry to activate what was supposedly the last part. I honestly believed maybe I missed something to make it go further into the story. However! SOMEHOW, Anders though being with me the ENTIRE time, had time to blow up the chantry. Seriously?! 

Unlike Origins, you've limited our options entirely and though you might have brought in a wider audience, you've in fact stamped on those who were here the entire time. I honestly felt cheated with how severely you severed my paths, making only two or three viable options, in spite of none really mattering because it all leads you down the same road.

[Archontor]

ziloe wrote...

Lithuasil wrote...

ziloe wrote...

I'm not even talking about just the epilogue. Your choices in Origins feel like they've mattered, because they actually hold some value throughout the game, instead of being one mini cutscene alternative, like in my previous example.

Except for when the origins decisions are just that - a glorified "pick your reward" in cutscene. Which is always.

It's sad that you can bash Origins, but can't even recognize the flaws in this game.

And you call yourself a writer. 

I must say agree with this Lithuasil person, the choices in origins didn't feel like massive changes, choices in Deus Ex and Alpha Protocol make a great deal of change.

[ziloe]

Archontor wrote...

ziloe wrote...

Lithuasil wrote...

ziloe wrote...

I'm not even talking about just the epilogue. Your choices in Origins feel like they've mattered, because they actually hold some value throughout the game, instead of being one mini cutscene alternative, like in my previous example.

Except for when the origins decisions are just that - a glorified "pick your reward" in cutscene. Which is always.

It's sad that you can bash Origins, but can't even recognize the flaws in this game.

And you call yourself a writer. 

I must say agree with this Lithuasil person, the choices in origins didn't feel like massive changes, choices in Deus Ex and Alpha Protocol make a great deal of change.

Don't forget the Ogre Battle series. I'm praying the PSP port does well enough that they continue the series.

[SupR G]

Maconbar wrote...

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's why The Empire Strikes Back is the worst of the bunch.

Actually in the case of Empire Strikes Back, it was the best one of them all. Unless you like Ewoks.