55 réponses à ce sujet

[Greed1914]

I cared mostly because the game kept providing me with reasons why both sides were right and wrong.  Templars would abuse their power, but then mages would do things that made it evident why people thought they should be locked up.  While I'm inclined to think that blood mages and abominations wouldn't be as common if it weren't for Templar actions, there is enough chicken vs. egg to it that it kept it from being a Mage = good, Templar = Bad, and added to the experience.

[trembli0s]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I stopped caring. why?

Because it ends up being dominated by insanity and demons at the end, it dehumanized the entire conflict. Add to that no character development for the two people who show up when you start the game.

I very very rarely like to approach problems this way, but at the end I was tempted to be like "screw it, exterminatus on Kirkwall".

Right on the money.  I DID care. 

I did the mage ending first and had a wtf moment  Why is he turning into the Harvester 2.0 and attacking me?

So I figured the Templar ending would be better and then it was ..... <_<

And then I realized it didn't matter and just started terminating ANYTHING THAT MOVED with extreme prejudice.

[Naughty Bear]

The politics in the story was the only interesting thing in the game. It was cool when everything ****s up, similiar to what is happening now, **** hitting the fan.

[Knightly_BW]

My only thought was people of Kirkwall, I was hoping to side with Grand Cleric and knock some sense on Orsino and Meredith. I didn't trust both camps. Templars lead by a lunatic woman, mages are so easy/willing to turn blood magic and consort demons. So both sides ain't better than other.

Also still can't really understand why Hawke was so important. Especially if you side with Templars. Without his interfrence Templars will win that war anyways (They have biggest army in Kirkwall). Why would seekers look for him? He was another blade on templars side. If we had an option to stop that war without siding with one, that will be more reasonable for seekers to look for that extra ordinary man/woman who can rise above such predijuices/influences.

According to current story I feel Hawke ain't important than Fenris/Sebastian who would side with templars or Bethany/Merrill who would side with mages.

[Anariel Theirin]

TJPags wrote...

Vhalkyrie wrote...

I'm surprised how many people put their personal feelings into it. As a RPG, I could put myself into a character where I could side with and justify siding with both sides.  I've played both pro-mage and pro-templar, and could sympathize with both.

My problem was that, try as I might, I could not put myself into that character, nor could I identify with either the mages or the Templars.  I could barely summon feelings for my companions.

In the end, I sided with them because calling for the Rite of Annullment after a non-circle mage (sitting 5 feet away on an overturned crate) is the one who blew up the Chantry was just wrong, to me.

Had nothing to do with Bethany being a mage, or being in the Circle, or even really caring about the mages.  Was just how I feel about things.

When connection with the story is missing, what else was I to fall back on?

This is pretty much exactly how I felt, and the only reason I sided with the mages too.  I wanted to care.  I tried really hard to care.  I just wasn't feeling it.  

I think it'd have helped the mages/templars plot a lot if the "Enigma of Kirkwall" information was put directly into the plot rather than as codex entries.  I missed some of these in my first playthrough, and upon reading them here, it helps a lot with understanding why everyone is insane, and definitely makes the plot more interesting.  This is why I feel the plot itself wasn't bad, it just wasn't given to us in a way that I think works well.

[Legbiter]

Well, some people hated the idea of darkspawn as the generic evil orcs to be slaughtered and would gladly have hopped on a boat to get away from the cookie cutter unorginality of it all.