146 réponses à ce sujet

[Selene Moonsong]

 Ease up, people, I've had about all the argument I can withstand in a day... 

DA II is about limited choice in an environment in which the Devs have designed the game. That does not mean it is less a FRPG game system. It is intentionally designed around a specific male or female character, so choices will have certain limitations built in given the intended design.

[The Brigand]

Edli wrote...

You simplified it to whether save Connor or not. Of course there are only 2 choices for that, what did you expect.
1. save Connor
1. Let Connor die
3. Save him only a bit or save him too much?? O_o .... what other options go in here

Option 3: Fake saving Connor for your own personal gain.

... wait.

[bEVEsthda]

Wygrath wrote...

 I keep seeing this stuff over and over and it's really gotten under my skin because it's all a subjective illusion brought about by your own differing expectations.

None of which have ever been fulfilled in any game let alone Origins.

I get that Dragon Age 2 is not game of the year quality, but it isn't half as bad as some on the forums here have played it out to be.

You didn't have "your warden" in Origins. If it was, than Hawke is "your champion" in as much as the warden was.
You didn't choose how his story unfolded, you just made choices along the way, just like in Dragon Age 2. 

The dialogue was laid out barebones for you, line for line, 1990's style and as dry as a bone. None of you wrote that dialogue so you didn't choose who the Warden was. You chose from a predetermined list of responses just like in Dragon Age 2. The difference is the wheel, which also had symbols to let you know the tone of the responses you chose.

Was the wheel spot on and perfectly accurate? Not at all. They just gave us paraphrased, short hand versions of the choices, which were not at all misleading. You can't say the same for the Origin's dialogue because every one who played chose a response that they thought would go over one way, but was seemingly taken out of context by the NPCs involved in the conversation.

If you guys really want a tailor made story/adventure/character, the only way you are going to get that is by getting a group of friends together, buying some table top RPG handbooks and manuals, and set about creating your own campaign.

So how about easying up on the me, me, me, mine, my, my stuff when discussing both Origins and DA2.

My answer to this is very simple:
You have no business whatsoever to tell me, or anyone else, what we want or do not want in games. Nor can you argue with me about how I should experience playing DA:O or DA2, because of this or that.
We offer reasoning as to why we are disappointed. Those reasons are not a cue for you to start a "No, you must be wrong, because it's really like this...." - argument.

[Baelyn]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Wygrath wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...



Yes you did.  Unless you can tell me who my Warden was that's a false statement. I know you were Hawke, wow that was easy.

Again guess how my DA game ended. I know DA2 ended with Hawke disapearing. But can you tell me which set of circumstances ended my game in DA ? I think not.

Wrong again In DA you had a list of defined responses. In DA2 you have a paraphrase and an icon.

Face it DA2 is no where near the CRPG DA was.

And the award for most angsty poster goes to... /drumroll

I'm not even touching the "which game was better" argument because it's a subjective thing and is outside of the realm of right and wrong. Is it wrong to like onions because you don't?

What's with all of the angery defensive assaults? I'm not attacking either game. I'm simply trying to point out that there a hell of alot more similarities between Origins and Dragon Age 2 than some of you are willing to admit.

It doesn't matter which game you liked more because that's a totally subjective thing and is therefore pointless to discuss unless you just want to post your thoughts over and over without ever learning anything or altering your views based on anyone else's input.

You are trying to play down the failures of DA2 by trying to make DA less than it was. That you even need to do that at all proves what a failure DA2 is better than a 1000 word essay.

Everything I said is fact. Want to try to argue be me guest.

You are trying to upsell the success of DA:O by trying to make DA2 less than it is. See I can do it too.

[Night Prowler76]

Wygrath wrote...

TJSolo wrote...

I don't PnP.
I don't LARP.
If I wanted to keep buying and playing action adventure games where I just watch a story unfold because I am able to fight my way to the next plot point, I would do that.
I want a cRPG story that is has choices with different consequences on the game world. That is why I got into cRPGs. Specifically that is what ME1 offered and got me hooked.

So I will not stop with the me me me crap because that is what brought me into the genre of cRPGs.

That's exactly what Dragon Age 2 offers to the letter. I would argue that your choices have heavier consequences than the ones you made in Origins.

OMG hahaha, are you from earth?

[mpchi]

Wygrath wrote...

 I keep seeing this stuff over and over and it's really gotten under my skin because it's all a subjective illusion brought about by your own differing expectations.

None of which have ever been fulfilled in any game let alone Origins.

I get that Dragon Age 2 is not game of the year quality, but it isn't half as bad as some on the forums here have played it out to be.

You didn't have "your warden" in Origins. If it was, than Hawke is "your champion" in as much as the warden was.
You didn't choose how his story unfolded, you just made choices along the way, just like in Dragon Age 2. 

The dialogue was laid out barebones for you, line for line, 1990's style and as dry as a bone. None of you wrote that dialogue so you didn't choose who the Warden was. You chose from a predetermined list of responses just like in Dragon Age 2. The difference is the wheel, which also had symbols to let you know the tone of the responses you chose.

Was the wheel spot on and perfectly accurate? Not at all. They just gave us paraphrased, short hand versions of the choices, which were not at all misleading. You can't say the same for the Origin's dialogue because every one who played chose a response that they thought would go over one way, but was seemingly taken out of context by the NPCs involved in the conversation.

If you guys really want a tailor made story/adventure/character, the only way you are going to get that is by getting a group of friends together, buying some table top RPG handbooks and manuals, and set about creating your own campaign.

So how about easying up on the me, me, me, mine, my, my stuff when discussing both Origins and DA2.

Good point. Just the number of "Dragon Age II should not be named as Dragon Age II" comments shows how astounding the whole 'me, me, me" mentality the negative posters have. They took the game far more personal than they should, as if the developers have no right to make the game they see fit. But rather they, the mere customers, were the creators themselves, instead of just someone that paid the money for a gaming service and experience. They have blurred the boundary with this 'me' mentality so much that it became 'just' to lash out harsh unrealistic criticism, bashing the game whenever the chance came up (spreading their hate in any discussion here), personal insults to Bioware and fellow gamers alike...instead of just showing their opinion by not recommending, buying, or playing the game.

"If you don't please ME, I'll bring you down at all cost!!!"

[CakesOnAPlane]

I prefer DA2's choices, they felt alot more personal and difficult than most of the quests in Origins.

[BeefoTheBold]

Narreneth wrote...

BeefoTheBold wrote...

Wygrath wrote...

BeefoTheBold wrote...

Wygrath wrote...

If you guys really want a tailor made story/adventure/character, the only way you are going to get that is by getting a group of friends together, buying some table top RPG handbooks and manuals, and set about creating your own campaign.

So how about easying up on the me, me, me, mine, my, my stuff when discussing both Origins and DA2.

No, this is incorrect in every possible way IMO.

First off, you CAN have choice in games. Not unlimited choice, no, but certainly far more choice than is presented in DA2. DAO is proof of this concept. The main story arc was what it was: You character rises to become a legendary Gray Warden and save the world from a Blight.

But it is the OTHER pieces that you are given choice on. What reward do you ask for? Do you make yourself King? How do you deal with Morrigan's offer? Who do you support in the Orzamaar? In the Brecilian Forest? In the Landsmeet?

In DAO there are real, meaningful choices that have a major and lasting impact on how the ending unfolds. In DA2 it doesn't matter what you do, you end up a complete failure at the end and you may as well never have played the game at all for all that you managed to influence the course of events.

And lastly, YES, the game IS about ME. It is about MY RISE as Champion of Kirkwall. It is about MY enjoyment. And most importantly, it is about how MY gaming dollar is spent. If I feel that I did not get the value I had hoped for for my investment of time and money then it is absolutely fine to say so.

If others do feel that they got what they wanted, they're also welcome to their own opinion.

I'm not saying you are not entitled to your opinion. I'm just asking for a little bit more perspective. You don't have to get all bent out of shape and huffy. 

I'm not trying to be a jerk or obtuse, but it really isn't about you or your rise to power. You're just along for the ride and you get to make a few decisions on how to get to the end. This was true of Origins as well. I'm sure this is just not something that we are going to see eye to eye on.

Morrigan's offer seems to be the only lasting choice that made any real difference as far as the overall world and narrative are concerned. Everything else is just flavor. 

As far as failing in the end, that's not at all the case. You also have the choice to be "King" or not in Dragon Age 2. The choice in Orzimmar had absolutely no effect on anything in the expansion/DLC or Dragon Age 2 and I don't consider that a significant choice. I'll reiterate that with the Werewolves/Elves. You get a little bone thrown to you in Dragon Age 2 over it, but ultimate nothing significant is changed by that decision, other than the final battle in Origins.

No, the choices exist and have meaningful consequences in the context of the DAO outcomes. The issue you're talking about are the problems with how the choices you make are handled POST DAO.

As in, so much of what you do that leads to different endings to DAO (very good!) is not built upon in subsequent games like it should have been. Both Awakenings and DA2 were rushed titles that tarnished what was there for DAO. 

This is why people aren't complaining as much about ME2 going further into shooter territory vs. ME1. Because at the very least the RPG elements of choice are being preserved. As an example, how you handled Wrex in ME1 leads to very important consequences in ME2. As does the decision at the end that revolves around the council and Anderson/Udina.

I'm one who liked ME1 better than ME2, but I'm not nearly as upset about the gameplay decisions that they made for ME2 because there is continuity of storyline and consistency in applying your choices from ME1 into real consequences in subsequent games.

This is not the case in the Dragon Age universe. In Dragon Age: Origins it set the stage perfectly for the choices you made in that game having a large scale impact in the next one. But the followthrough was not there and that is a large part of what people like me are complaining about.

Taking this one step further, there is not one, single, significant choice that you make during the entirety of Dragon Age 2. The same people die and the same outcomes take place regardless of what you do or don't do. The world does not at ALL change based on your decisions.

This is quantifiably different than, say, choosing Harrowmont over Bhelan leading dwarves to pursue more isolationist/conservative policies in the end. That is something that absolutely could have been built upon in DA2 if the designers had decided to. Again, choice was there in DAO, it just wasn't followed up on and built upon in DA2.

There are 3 endings.  You kill the Archdemon and live.  Having Alistair or Loghain kill it is the same damn thing in this case.  You kill the Archdemon and die.  You have someone else kill the Archdemon and die.

Three endings.  Everything else is just supplementary to give you the illusion of consequence and choice.  As was the point of the original post.  A paragraph at the end that tells me what Harrowmont did versus what Bhelen did is NOT an alternate ending.  You're being utterly ridiculous.

No, I'm really not. These are differences in the ending that spell out the consequences of your choices that could have, if Bioware had taken the time to do so, been actually capitalized on in Awakenings and Dragon Age 2 instead of being pretty much ignored.

Again, look at ME2 as an example. There's a dramatic difference in the Krogan homeworld depending on a certain event in handling Wrex. This doesn't change that, yes, there are only four main ways you can end ME1, but it has real consequences AS A RESULT OF YOUR CHOICES in Mass Effect 2.

This is not ridiculous, but rather concrete examples of the stage that Dragon Age Origins set that were not capitilized on in the sequel that COULD HAVE BEEN and WERE in the Mass Effect universe.

You are focusing 100% on ONLY the main plot choice and completely ignoring that other choices can also have an impact. Obviously, for narrative reasons, you can't have 20 different endings to the main plot of Dragon Age Origins because it would be impossibly expensive to code and develop the sequel.

But you can and SHOULD carry over some of the OTHER significant choices in the first game into the second. ME2 did this. DA2 did not.

[F-C]

the OP has a point though.

i keep reading the line "where is my choice" and blah blah.


its a computer program... no matter how delusional you might be.... you are always going to be limited by the set of predefined choices they programmed in... if the choices are made as a list or put around a wheel does not matter.



yesturday i saw one guy complain saying he wanted choices in dao, not on a wheel like da2...

and im just sitting there wondering why does it matter if the choices are put in a list format, or a wheel format, is this guy really so self-illusioned to think it changes anything at all?

i just dont get half of the posters, its like they are living in dream-land.

[mpchi]

F-C wrote...

the OP has a point though.

i keep reading the line "where is my choice" and blah blah.


its a computer program... no matter how delusional you might be.... you are always going to be limited by the set of predefined choices they programmed in... if the choices are made as a list or put around a wheel does not matter.



yesturday i saw one guy complain saying he wanted choices in dao, not on a wheel like da2...

and im just sitting there wondering why does it matter if the choices are put in a list format, or a wheel format, is this guy really so self-illusioned to think it changes anything at all?

i just dont get half of the posters, its like they are living in dream-land.

Yeah, totally. Don't see whats the big deal that ruins their life apparently...

I like the wheel format in a way that it gives you a little suspense and surprise of what you make your character say, while still in line with your selected dialogue choice. Just an extra sense of exploration on the conversation. But I can live with the way they do it in DA:O too.

[Sacred_Fantasy]

Wygrath wrote...
You didn't have "your warden" in Origins. If it was, than Hawke is "your champion" in as much as the warden was.
You didn't choose how his story unfolded, you just made choices along the way, just like in Dragon Age 2.

 
Sorry but I have "my warden". I don't have "my champion". I have abandon not 1 but 2 of "my champions" before they even  declared as the champion. The "BioWare Champion" currently reside in my DA 2 is the puppet that I get to control. Why? Because she can speak and behave on her own. My warden never speaks without my input. My warden never suffer personality clashes with voice tone changes. And my warden never cause me to cringe every time  he speaks because he never tell different words. Most important of all my warden don't voice a different person. 

Wygrath wrote...
The dialogue was laid out barebones for you, line for line, 1990's style and as dry as a bone. None of you wrote that dialogue so you didn't choose who the Warden was You chose from a predetermined list of responses just like in Dragon Age 2. The difference is the wheel, which also had symbols to let you know the tone of the responses you chose..

I know what I choose. I never play the guessing game.  I always get my intent. In DA 2, I am blind except I know the tone. The predetermined list is useless because I don't know the exact outcome. You know what? I don't even read the predetermine list. My choices are completely base on olive leaf, purple mask/diamond, and red hand. Because the tone don't mislead me. The problem that I never have connecting to my warden. Nevertheless, The tone help me to create 3 dominant characters. Unfortunately each of this characters has facial expressions that I would never imagine to imprint on my warden. Why? because I never see my own facial expression when I talk to someone else. On the other hand, I know other person facial expression. You know who this other person is? That's right. The person is called Hawke. 

Wygrath wrote...
You can't say the same for the Origin's dialogue because every one who played chose a response that they thought would go over one way, but was seemingly taken out of context by the NPCs involved in the conversation.

You know what NPCs are? NON Player Control. They are AI. They don't have the normal brain and eyes that can tell them what your  reaction is. They follow the predetermined set of rules written by the programmers who never get to see you with their own eyes. Your logic to apply with this NPCs is flaw.

You have control over your response but you rather give it up and be tied by set of tightly predefined 2 way communications written by the programmer. All because you think this NPCs can generally perceive you like normal human being. Do you know robot is never perfect?  Do you know, the more you give up your control over your own response the closer you are to watch a movie? 

Wygrath wrote...
If you guys really want a tailor made story/adventure/character, the only way you are going to get that is by getting a group of friends together, buying some table top RPG handbooks and manuals, and set about creating your own campaign.

So how about easying up on the me, me, me, mine, my, my stuff when discussing both Origins and DA2.

And here I thought why we have cRPG to help with the routine of table top. in the first place. Obviously some people already forget about that.

So how about stop being difficult as he, he, he, he, he, he, him, his, his stuff when discussing both Origins and DA 2?

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 26 mars 2011 - 08:34 .

[SlamminHams]

Wygrath wrote...

 I would argue that your choices have heavier consequences than the ones you made in Origins.

Someone actually typed this and pressed "Submit." ...?  I'm in awe.  You can decide two things in DA2;  Who you bed and who you have as friends.  Beyond that, it doesn't matter.  The game stays the same.

Probably the coolest decision you have to make in DA2 isn't even a decision, it's an initially unknown consequence of bringing your party makeup for the Deep Roads.

[bEVEsthda]

mpchi wrote...

Wygrath wrote...

 I keep seeing this stuff over and over and it's really gotten under my skin because ....
< Lotsa whining about other posters>

Good point. Just the number of "Dragon Age II should not be named as Dragon Age II" comments shows how astounding the whole 'me, me, me" mentality the negative posters have. They took the game far more personal than they should, as if the developers have no right to make the game they see fit. But rather they, the mere customers, were the creators themselves, instead of just someone that paid the money for a gaming service and experience. They have blurred the boundary with this 'me' mentality so much that it became 'just' to lash out harsh unrealistic criticism, bashing the game whenever the chance came up (spreading their hate in any discussion here), personal insults to Bioware and fellow gamers alike...instead of just showing their opinion by not recommending, buying, or playing the game.

"If you don't please ME, I'll bring you down at all cost!!!"

He doesn't have any point at all. Neither have you. You're just fantazising and whining about other people's opinions. Generalizing, grouping together, and phrasing their 'opinions' yourself, for your greater ease and satisfaction at your own fantasies and whining.

Just for your information, since you do not seem to have understood this, the 'not-naming-it-DA2' comments concerns the opinion that this game would have been better received, would have avoided the net-rage, and sold better, if it could have been handed off as something else than the sequel to DA:O. Like DA:Champion. They could have said that it was an attempt to open the DA franchise, and classic rpg-gaming, also to a more console friendly model. (Which is actually exactly what it is, even if it's also the death of the DA:O model).

[Everwarden]

SlamminHams wrote...

Wygrath wrote...

 I would argue that your choices have heavier consequences than the ones you made in Origins.

Someone actually typed this and pressed "Submit." ...?  I'm in awe.  You can decide two things in DA2;  Who you bed and who you have as friends.  Beyond that, it doesn't matter.  The game stays the same.

Probably the coolest decision you have to make in DA2 isn't even a decision, it's an initially unknown consequence of bringing your party makeup for the Deep Roads.

I felt the exact same way, and was about to type something extremely similar. But since you already said it better than I would have, I'll just say..

Quoted for truth. Wygrath gets +50 internets. 

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

If a game ruins a person's life then that person does need to seek help. But also, people shouldn't exajurate and straw man people who point out the limitations of the sequel over the first game by calling them whiners or saying their lives were ruined somehow because DA 2 lacks the features of the first. People should try to understand interests are different and perspective is important to be respectful. Try to persuade others to your perspective with facts and/or a basis to your opinions, don't insult them with cheap sarcasm. That does a fine job of nothing fast.

[Vicious]

Because they want pen and paper, they don't want any of Bioware's stories at all.

If you've been on the boards long enough [before this social website] you would know the kind of insanity that people wanted for Dragon Age: Origins.

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

Vicious wrote...

Because they want pen and paper, they don't want any of Bioware's stories at all.

If you've been on the boards long enough [before this social website] you would know the kind of insanity that people wanted for Dragon Age: Origins.

Awesome, you proved my point exactly. That is a great generalization of anyone who disagrees with you.

[Otterwarden]

Narreneth wrote...

Ryllen Laerth Kriel wrote...

If you are a Dalish elf, you can get lands set aside for your people.

Again, talking to someone at the end and having them go "Yes! You can have the lands!" Is not a new ending or an actual consequence.  It's satisfying, but it doesn't actually have an effect on the story or the world. 

It only doesn't have a consequence if the developers choose to make a sequel where this fact, and most of the choices you made, are irrelevant.  Imagine a DA2 story where your choice allows the elves to prosper vs. rot away in the ghettos.  It's not the player's fault if the role playing is an illusion.  Part of the astonishment has been this complete lack of tie-ins and inconsistencies like Lelianna. 

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

Otterwarden wrote...

Narreneth wrote...

Ryllen Laerth Kriel wrote...

If you are a Dalish elf, you can get lands set aside for your people.

Again, talking to someone at the end and having them go "Yes! You can have the lands!" Is not a new ending or an actual consequence.  It's satisfying, but it doesn't actually have an effect on the story or the world. 

It only doesn't have a consequence if the developers choose to make a sequel where this fact, and most of the choices you made, are irrelevant.  Imagine a DA2 story where your choice allows the elves to prosper vs. rot away in the ghettos.  It's not the player's fault if the role playing is an illusion.  Part of the astonishment has been this complete lack of tie-ins and inconsistencies like Lelianna. 

I agree, it is a let down when some roleplay decisions are not followed up on. I had modest hopes decisions would show up on a larger scale than they did in both DA 2 and in ME 2 but it was all just tiny background information that was mentioned in very small parts. Hopefully in DA 3 and ME 3 Bioware will prove me wrong and the decisions carried over will matter.

[Alikain]

Wygrath wrote...

BeefoTheBold wrote...

Wygrath wrote...

If you guys really want a tailor made story/adventure/character, the only way you are going to get that is by getting a group of friends together, buying some table top RPG handbooks and manuals, and set about creating your own campaign.

So how about easying up on the me, me, me, mine, my, my stuff when discussing both Origins and DA2.

No, this is incorrect in every possible way IMO.

First off, you CAN have choice in games. Not unlimited choice, no, but certainly far more choice than is presented in DA2. DAO is proof of this concept. The main story arc was what it was: You character rises to become a legendary Gray Warden and save the world from a Blight.

But it is the OTHER pieces that you are given choice on. What reward do you ask for? Do you make yourself King? How do you deal with Morrigan's offer? Who do you support in the Orzamaar? In the Brecilian Forest? In the Landsmeet?

In DAO there are real, meaningful choices that have a major and lasting impact on how the ending unfolds. In DA2 it doesn't matter what you do, you end up a complete failure at the end and you may as well never have played the game at all for all that you managed to influence the course of events.

And lastly, YES, the game IS about ME. It is about MY RISE as Champion of Kirkwall. It is about MY enjoyment. And most importantly, it is about how MY gaming dollar is spent. If I feel that I did not get the value I had hoped for for my investment of time and money then it is absolutely fine to say so.

If others do feel that they got what they wanted, they're also welcome to their own opinion.

I'm not saying you are not entitled to your opinion. I'm just asking for a little bit more perspective. You don't have to get all bent out of shape and huffy. 

I'm not trying to be a jerk or obtuse, but it really isn't about you or your rise to power. You're just along for the ride and you get to make a few decisions on how to get to the end. This was true of Origins as well. I'm sure this is just not something that we are going to see eye to eye on.

Morrigan's offer seems to be the only lasting choice that made any real difference as far as the overall world and narrative are concerned. Everything else is just flavor. 

As far as failing in the end, that's not at all the case. You also have the choice to be "King" or not in Dragon Age 2. The choice in Orzimmar had absolutely no effect on anything in the expansion/DLC or Dragon Age 2 and I don't consider that a significant choice. I'll reiterate that with the Werewolves/Elves. You get a little bone thrown to you in Dragon Age 2 over it, but ultimate nothing significant is changed by that decision, other than the final battle in Origins.

You got it all wrong. in Origins it about you and you are not there just for the ride. i can understand that if you say that about DA2 because it a story been told by one of your party memeber which is from his point of view. in Origins there is notthing like a story been told by anyone. no one really knows what is going to happen. the choice you made in origin stick out more then DA2. for all we know the one telling the story could be lying about how you became champaion.

Modifié par Alikain, 26 mars 2011 - 09:12 .

[CRISIS1717]

Essentially the only role you are playing is picking the tone of Hawkes voice. The game is abysmal imo, if there was a worst game of the year award this game would get my vote.

[mpchi]

bEVEsthda wrote...

mpchi wrote...

Wygrath wrote...

 I keep seeing this stuff over and over and it's really gotten under my skin because ....
< Lotsa whining about other posters>

Good point. Just the number of "Dragon Age II should not be named as Dragon Age II" comments shows how astounding the whole 'me, me, me" mentality the negative posters have. They took the game far more personal than they should, as if the developers have no right to make the game they see fit. But rather they, the mere customers, were the creators themselves, instead of just someone that paid the money for a gaming service and experience. They have blurred the boundary with this 'me' mentality so much that it became 'just' to lash out harsh unrealistic criticism, bashing the game whenever the chance came up (spreading their hate in any discussion here), personal insults to Bioware and fellow gamers alike...instead of just showing their opinion by not recommending, buying, or playing the game.

"If you don't please ME, I'll bring you down at all cost!!!"

He doesn't have any point at all. Neither have you. You're just fantazising and whining about other people's opinions. Generalizing, grouping together, and phrasing their 'opinions' yourself, for your greater ease and satisfaction at your own fantasies and whining.

Just for your information, since you do not seem to have understood this, the 'not-naming-it-DA2' comments concerns the opinion that this game would have been better received, would have avoided the net-rage, and sold better, if it could have been handed off as something else than the sequel to DA:O. Like DA:Champion. They could have said that it was an attempt to open the DA franchise, and classic rpg-gaming, also to a more console friendly model. (Which is actually exactly what it is, even if it's also the death of the DA:O model).

Good job in 'generalizing and whining' about my thoughts so to speak, then dismiss it altogether and give it some nice 'fantasies' labeling. How you behaved is exactly what I meant in my previous post, and you volunteered to be a great example of that.

You have my thanks (as Morrigan would say).

[AkiKishi]

Vicious wrote...

Because they want pen and paper, they don't want any of Bioware's stories at all.

If you've been on the boards long enough [before this social website] you would know the kind of insanity that people wanted for Dragon Age: Origins.

I have no idea where people get this idea that you can do whatever you like in PnP..

The only difference between PnP and CRPG is that in PnP the DM can adapt on the fly , where as in a CRPG setting everything must be pre-programmed.

I've met DMs who act like the players are only there to tell the story they are chosing to tell. A good DM like a good CRPG gives the players room to do certain things without breaking the story as a result. One of the most important being the players feeling their characters actions matter in the campaign. If that is not the case, they may as well read a book or watch a movie.

In DA2 Hawkes relevance ends the moment the item is discovered. Events were already on that path before he arrived and would have continued with or without him except this one scripted event accelerates the breakdown.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 26 mars 2011 - 10:05 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Some choices in DA:O had direct impact on thre world...and immediate one to boot.

Dalish clan surviving and dalish getting their own land? Big impact - PLAYER CHOICE
How about armies?
elves or warevolves?
golems of dwarves? The player can end the curse and destroy the anvil, directly and immediately influencing the world.

The full impact of some of those choices is not immediate, and should be handeled in the sequel (but wasn't).

The player in DA:O has a CHOICE and can affect and change Ferelden. DA:O evne had several endings. The player can even die.


DA2? What impact does the player have? What big choice is there?
You can pick mages or templars - nothing changes.

[Baelyn]

****SPOILERS BELOW****

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Dalish clan surviving and dalish getting their own land? Big impact - PLAYER CHOICE

In DA2, you also have choice on whether an entire Dalish clan survives or not.

How about armies?

You can't say that DA2 doesn't have this for sure. DA2 was obviously a set up for something big, and there is every indication that whether you sided with the mages or the templars decides who is going to be on your side in future expansions/games

elves or warevolves?

You can choose to end the Qunari conflict peacefully by giving them Isabela (if you made the right CHOICES and she actually comes back) or you can kill the Arishok. Both of which will most likely have consequences in the future, like most DA:O "choices."

golems of dwarves? The player can end the curse and destroy the anvil, directly and immediately influencing the world.

You can choose whether to let the "mysterious rock wraith thing" live in the Deep Roads, which we don't even really know what it was so who knows what consequences that will have.

I'll go on to name some more. You choose the fate of your brother/sister. Choose to kill or let a serial killer go (Kessler sp?...the elf guy not your mom's guy). Its VERY obvious to me that Feynriel is going to have some major consequences later on. Kill Anders or not. (And if you have DLC Sebastian has some interesting choices that you make in his development. You, again, can make a deal with a demon to gain power (In 2 scenarios.) Thrask...And I am sure there is more I missed.

The full impact of some of those choices is not immediate, and should be handeled in the sequel (but wasn't).

As is the case with Dragon Age 2. This is an episodic game. The problem isn't that you didn't have choices, its that people want to see IMMEDIATE resultls. The only reason you saw that in SOME of the choices in DA:O was because of slides at the end of the game, which is cheap IMO. No you don't see alot of the impact of your choices (although I would argue you see a substantial amount and I'd provide that if asked) because this was neither the time nor the place to reveal that. IMO they put plenty of hints and cameos in DA2 for you to realize that this is the same world that YOUR specific warden lived in, anymore and it would have seemed out of place.

The way the game ended almost ensures in my mind that now they are at a place in developing the story and the conflict that from here we can actually start to see really what happened because of things we did (in both games). I think its too early in both cases (DA:O and DA2) to say..."Man...all that for nothing...None of my choices even mattered."

EDIT -Fixed BBCode

Modifié par Baelyn, 27 mars 2011 - 02:04 .