193 réponses à ce sujet

[Aurgelmir]

LukaCrosszeria wrote...

That is uncalled for. I've rarely seen developers as involved with forums as David Gaider.

And there I agree with you, David Gaider does do the community a service by maintaining such close relations with the fans. I would make the point though that his posts tend to be filled with hubris and arrogance, he makes no apologies if fans dislike something that has been written and makes it clear that this is 'his story' and is utterly uncompromising on that.

If he were George RR Martin or Tarantino, then I wouldn't have any issue with that. But this isn't a film or a novel or any other piece of non interactive entertainment. This is a CRPG and I want to make as many of the decisions on how I play the game as I can e.g.

In DA:O I can kill the werewolves, I can kill the elves, I can cure the werewolves, I can kill the werewolves and double cross the Keeper.

Thats just one example of dozens, in DA2 you don't have that many alternatives, you can make your tone to be grumpy or happy or any of the other seven dwarves, but you can't change the outcome. Why? Some will say its a deadline issue, but I feel from reading Gaiders posts that he feels that this is his story and he doesen't want the player 'ruining' it.

Modifié par Aurgelmir, 26 mars 2011 - 12:34 .

[LukaCrosszeria]

Btw there is a constructive criticism thread. Can you not go there please?

Edit: I mean the OP.

Modifié par LukaCrosszeria, 26 mars 2011 - 01:03 .

[LukaCrosszeria]

Aurgelmir wrote...

LukaCrosszeria wrote...

That is uncalled for. I've rarely seen developers as involved with forums as David Gaider.

And there I agree with you, David Gaider does do the community a service by maintaining such close relations with the fans. I would make the point though that his posts tend to be filled with hubris and arrogance, he makes no apologies if fans dislike something that has been written and makes it clear that this is 'his story' and is utterly uncompromising on that.

If he were George RR Martin or Tarantino, then I wouldn't have any issue with that. But this isn't a film or a novel or any other piece of non interactive entertainment. This is a CRPG and I want to make as many of the decisions on how I play the game as I can e.g.

In DA:O I can kill the werewolves, I can kill the elves, I can cure the werewolves, I can kill the werewolves and double cross the Keeper.

Thats just one example of dozens, in DA2 you don't have that many alternatives, you can make your tone to be grumpy or happy or any of the other seven dwarves, but you can't change the outcome. Why? Some will say its a deadline issue, but I feel from reading Gaiders posts that he feels that this is his story and he doesen't want the player 'ruining' it.

True, it's not a novel. You couldn't change the outcome of DA:O either though.

[Aurgelmir]

LukaCrosszeria wrote...

True, it's not a novel. You couldn't change the outcome of DA:O either though.

To quote the good Shepherd: 'How you get there is the worthier part'.

[LukaCrosszeria]

Aurgelmir wrote...

LukaCrosszeria wrote...

True, it's not a novel. You couldn't change the outcome of DA:O either though.

To quote the good Shepherd: 'How you get there is the worthier part'.

Well, to me it's about the journey, not the end. It's a confusing issue, the writing is both brilliant and falls short at the same time.

[Zeulon]

What makes DA2 story bad isn´t the lack of choice per se but the fact that the Hawke ( the protagonist!) is the most bland and unimportant part of the whole game. His motivation is vague at best, his decision have no impact and from start to finish he remains a glorified errand boy/ thug.

Modifié par Zeulon, 26 mars 2011 - 01:22 .

[Aurgelmir]

Zeulon wrote...

What makes DA2 story bad isn´t the lack of choice per se but the fact that the Hawke ( the protagonist!) is the most bland and unimportant part of the whole game. His motivation is vague at best, his decision have no impact and from start to finish he remains a glorified errand boy/ thug.

Ah, I agree, but I think for a different reason. I believe that Hawke is bland, but I think its because we can't define him through decisions.  My Warden was a bastard, jerk, nice guy, hero based on the things he done, did he leave redcliffe to die? did he destroy the circle? did he kill his companions? all those things defined who he was, for me amyway.

[Maleficent]

Rule number one:there are no rules.
Rule number two:beginning,middle and end,again no strict guidelines to adhere to on this point because every player,reader,viewer,listener or observer is different.Different mind,different thought process,different sensory perception.

[Maleficent]

Here is my point here.Op you claim that you are a ''writer'',let us say that you can write a book,a movie script,a poem or a short story but one thing that all those entertainment formats do not have is many other elements that a video game does.In a book its just text ,a movie is just script>location>actors>effects>edit.With a game many many other elements have to come into effect and the writing must fall in as one element.Sometimes writing is changed to suit the artistic direction or level design ,and visa versa.When you weigh all that up you're original post becomes simply opinion.My opinion is that ,no not it's perfect but the writers should not be ashamed of themselves.Its more out of the box than Origins was and thats why I like it its done in a more down to earth way.I for one enjoyed both stories but in fairness I like Da2's more:)

ps Im not trying to start a flame war ,just stating my 2 cents:)

[Baelyn]

Aurgelmir wrote...

LukaCrosszeria wrote...

True, it's not a novel. You couldn't change the outcome of DA:O either though.

To quote the good Shepherd: 'How you get there is the worthier part'.

Then you contradict yourself here.

You say:

"DA2 you can't change the outcome."

Above poster says:

"DA:O you can't change the outcome either."

You say:

"Its all about how you get there."

[Thalorin1919]

DragonKingReborn wrote...

SupR G wrote...

Evolution33 wrote...

Where is it a rule that every story in a series has to be self contained?

An unwritten rule for any good writer. It's also considered to be a standard.

You may wish to try reading books seven, eight and eleven of the Wheel of Time, or ANY of the A Song of Ice and Fire books before standing by that statement.  ANYONE who claims Robert Jordan or George RR Martin aren't 'good' writers, needs to consider whether or not they've actually read any good books.

Also, almost any fantasy series, whether it be novels, films or, I guess, games, has a continuing story of some form.

And, finally, as far as I can tell, a cliffhanger ending is not mutually exclusive of a complete story.  Beginning, middle, end.  Those are the things a story needs.  The story was about how Hawke became the champion and why they are regarded as the most important person in the history of Thedas.  Those who have completed the game know these things.  Complete story.

What he's saying is that this story didn't feel 'complete', while others of A Song of Ice and Fire did. With a framed narrative, it usually is told up to a point, and then the ending sequence comes afterwards. There wasn't really a final resolution or anything.

With books like A Song of Ice and Fire, GRRM was able to give the books a final resolution. So sure, there were cliffhangers, but it didn't feel like that book wasn't complete. Except for A Feast for Crows...he went with cheap endings for a few characters on that one, if you know who I'm referring to.

[Riloux]

I certainly agree. The story sounds alright on paper, but in execution it falls short in the coherency and continuity categories. Looking back at the DLC and expansion, I feel like nothing of my curiosity was sated and all they gave us is more questions which just give them room for more games, and let's not forget, money.

SupR G wrote...
Developers like Bioware sometimes need to put their foot down and explain the fact that a quality game takes TIME. 

I guess it's no longer about quality for Bioware, but quantity-- of  bucks.

[Thalorin1919]

LukaCrosszeria wrote...

Aurgelmir wrote...

LukaCrosszeria wrote...

That is uncalled for. I've rarely seen developers as involved with forums as David Gaider.

And there I agree with you, David Gaider does do the community a service by maintaining such close relations with the fans. I would make the point though that his posts tend to be filled with hubris and arrogance, he makes no apologies if fans dislike something that has been written and makes it clear that this is 'his story' and is utterly uncompromising on that.

If he were George RR Martin or Tarantino, then I wouldn't have any issue with that. But this isn't a film or a novel or any other piece of non interactive entertainment. This is a CRPG and I want to make as many of the decisions on how I play the game as I can e.g.

In DA:O I can kill the werewolves, I can kill the elves, I can cure the werewolves, I can kill the werewolves and double cross the Keeper.

Thats just one example of dozens, in DA2 you don't have that many alternatives, you can make your tone to be grumpy or happy or any of the other seven dwarves, but you can't change the outcome. Why? Some will say its a deadline issue, but I feel from reading Gaiders posts that he feels that this is his story and he doesen't want the player 'ruining' it.

True, it's not a novel. You couldn't change the outcome of DA:O either though.

In a sense, you could.

I mean, it's all been stated before, but in Origins you can decide who kills the archdemon, who rules Ferelden. And all the decisions before that - such as who rules Orzammar, what happened to the Dalish, etc.

You change what happened to Ferelden by the end of the game, no-matter what, but it can all be different. With DA2, you go about the same linear path. You can pick a side at the end, but the ending is changed by like two more lines.

[Aurgelmir]

Baelyn wrote...

Aurgelmir wrote...

LukaCrosszeria wrote...

True, it's not a novel. You couldn't change the outcome of DA:O either though.

To quote the good Shepherd: 'How you get there is the worthier part'.

Then you contradict yourself here.

You say:

"DA2 you can't change the outcome."

Above poster says:

"DA:O you can't change the outcome either."

You say:

"Its all about how you get there."

Not at all. You seem to have misread what I said. I spoke of the game in its entirety being linear, not just the ending, almost every quest on the way to it as well. By its very nature the game is linear. And when I'm going from quest to quest, the 'journey', I feel the game is linear.

[cast_]

I basically hated this game, especially the story. That being said I think the writers did a good job for what I'm guessing their bosses wanted them to do. IE write half a story to milk another 49.99$ out of us with the 2nd part.

[Tirigon]

v_ware wrote...

I don't think the writers should be ashamed. The story is different, not the everyday run of the mill, let's save the world-plot. If they would've taken more then 18 months this would have been amazing. Not just good.

Oh indeed. The story is so f*cking AMAZINGLY SPECIAL I shall from now on feel like a hero when working to gather money. Because, hey, that´s what Hawke did and it was SPECIAL!!!!!!!!!!!!

[amyty]

 I'm still muddling through my first play-through and only as far as the second act, so I can't comment on the story as a whole, but I agree that there is something fundamental missing for me in this game.

I don't necessarily think it is the story itself that is bothering me, it's the lack of connection with my character.

In Origins my character had an objective, and I had an objective, and the two aligned so that I felt a connection with my Warden; we were both off to stop the Blight.

In this game I know that Hawke is going to become the Champion, but she lacks that purpose. I have to drive her through a series of problems that will eventually meet that end, but I don't feel the same connection as I did with a character who also knew what she must do.

I care less for the story of my character. I think this is where the game lets me down. 

My Origins Warden developed relationships, forged alliances, and met a very satisfying (if tragic) conclusion, and I was with her every step (and tent visit) along the way.

Hawke's relationships are empty, forced at best. The dialogue for romancing other characters makes me cringe into my coffee.

The limitations of a city-bound story and the foregone conclusion of becoming the Champion in no way precludes the potential for great characterisation and deep relationships with people we care about. Each battle could mean something other than 'not dying'. In Origins each battle was another step toward achieving the Warden's goal, which was also my goal. Hawke doesn't have that same.. purpose.

So, yeah.. I'm pretty disappointed so far too. Maybe by the end I'll change my mind, but right now it's hard to feel motivated to finish a game whose primary character means as much to me as an NPC.

Modifié par amyty, 30 mars 2011 - 05:14 .

[TheLostMinstrel]

I'll admit that my second playthrough of the first part of Act 1 was a little' - and then we do this and then that one -' until I realised that there were difference in having imported different saves and that made it more enjoyable. Other than that I thought the story for DA2 was brilliant. Different, nothing like DA:O but I didn't want a repaint of DA:O. I think that would have been a cop out and I have more respect for Bioware for not doing that.

Whereas DA:O is about the sucker that happened to be wherever Duncan was (all the origins happened but only your character had Duncan's intervention), who then has no option but to stop the Blight although how you treat the four main quests is completely up to you. Either way you collect armies, you kill the Archdemon and that is the end. Literally finished by the beginnning of Act 1 in DA2. In comparison, I took DA2 to be about a rather semi-special person (very skilled, magic in the family and of noble blood) who met a legend by chance which saved her life and who then decides to better themselves and ends up being dragged along while the bigger picture evolves. There's missions in the first act that mean that the Viscount is aware of you and that you can get stuff done and that becomes later. I prefered that than someone randomly asking you to do some all important errand/quest for them despite not knowing you from Adam.

As for the overarching story, I'll admit, I never thought DA:O was about the Warden. I took the DA franchise to be about Thedas during the Dragon Age, named because it is expected to be a time of change and violence.

I'm not sure if this counts as a spoiler being NPC banter but was I the only person that looked at Return to Ostagar in particular and DA:O as whole in a completely different light because there are rumours that Orlais wants to retake Fereldan? Just me?

[SoR82]

I dont know whether it was just me but I never really felt.... He/she who must not be named was at the centre of all this, it lacked the...."this is me" factor that rpgs need. The story for me was hit and miss some bits i enjoyed like Petrice desperatly trying to stir up trouble and the qunarii... even with those sodding horns.

Othertimes I was bored of out my brains. There was just so much... waffle at times for want of a better word you could smell the polyfiller XD