180 réponses à ce sujet

[Visanideth]

Zmajc wrote...

Maybe this would work out better if you had more than 3 dialogue options.

Also ... what if you select a different answer every dialogue not allways a  fixed "good" "bad" "xyz" answer every time? Because i varied my answers alot  and i didn't feel my hawk develop into any of those distinct personalities.

Another problem i see is that there's basically only 1 fixed ending. Whathever you do, whoever you become
you allways do same fixed decisions game makes for you.

I can't remember how many times i wanted to make a middle ground decision that simply wasn't there or wanted to kill someone i wasn't allowed to. 

Past games had so much more options there.

There are more. You're not getting the system. If your Hawke is flagged "aggressive", when using an aggressive answer you may get something a sarcastic Hawke wouldn't get. My sarcastic mage eventually became clownish even when I picked diplomatic options, and I was quite surprised by seeing my Hawke saying different things in scripted conversations depending on how I was playing him.

You're really, really not getting the system. It's possibly still underdeveloped in points, but it's something downright amazing.

[AkiKishi]

Visanideth wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

My question to you then is this: Why does Hawke need any player input at all with conversation ?

Because "Hawke" is the role, you're the actor. That is what roleplay in videogames can be.

Hawke is a character - he has a family, origin, and a set of events ahead of him.
We're like actors playing him. You're Robert DeNiro playing him, your Hawke is a somewhat diplomatic, somewhat sarcastic fellow who pretends not to care but helpes everyone. I'm Gerald Butler playing him, my Hawke is a roid-raged warrior who's pissed at everything and believes in getting things his way no matter what.

And the game will react to that. You'll shape the character, and the world will react to that, giving you different conversations and tones.


Now, would we all prefer to have a system that does that AND lets you create your own character? Much likely. Problem is, I don't see it as doable, Bioware probably doesn't, and the alternative is having a character you create and has NO input whatsoever in the game aside from picking answers from a list that doesn't change if your character is a charitable templar or a bloodthirsty cutthroat.

Actors follow a set script JRPG fashion, they don't have or need player input. You don't press a button while watching a movie to change someones line. You don't need to do that, in the same way Hake does not need player input. Any of the options fit with Hawke, that's not roleplaying, thats just choosing.

In DA you had set options. But they would never fit one character. One of my more extreme Wardens the City Elf, hated humans, cheerfully killed any that got in the way ,let Redwall burn and was not a an all round nice guy. Having Morrigan and Sten with him, just reinforced his behaviours.

Totally different to my Human Noble who was very upstanding cared about everyone a bit too much, he often lost sight of the bigger picture in pursuit of emotional side quests. Had no regrets making the ultimate sacfrice for the greater good.

Same game two very different characters.

[blacqout]

BobSmith101 wrote...

blacqout wrote...
Uhm, no it wouldn't have. The DAII prologue works pretty well in establishing the Hawke's as a fairly tight-knit family unit. That they're instantly with you as the game starts, sends some strong unconscious messages.

Whether you wish to admit it or not, you knew that Bethany, Leandra, Carver and Hawke were family. I take the spelling mistakes in that graphic to be somewhat indicative of its overall quality.

Anybody that seriously needed a big builld up to introducing family members has my pity.

Also, as far as the "remember me" conversations go in act 1, i kind of liked them. They offered some insight into what Hawke was doing in his first year, and leave you free to use your imagination a little. The conversation between Hawke and Elegant was suggestive enough that if you like, you could reasonably assume that the two had more than a professional relationship at some point.

I'm pretty sure if a family member were to be squished by an Ogre I could manage a bit more than meh, let's keep moving.

If you're talking about your personal reaction to the death, then that's a problem with your roleplaying ability.

If you're talking about Hawke's in-game reaction to the death, then that's a problem with your honesty. Because he doesn't say that, not in the implied tone.

[Cutlass Jack]

BobSmith101 wrote...

I'm pretty sure if a family member were to be squished by an Ogre I could manage a bit more than meh, let's keep moving.

I'm pretty sure that if my father was dying and my Mother refused to move. I wouldn't wave and say "Have fun you two then. I'm off to join the Wardens." I would put saving my family over all other niceties no matter what the cost.

So when Hawke says whatever it takes to get his mother moving, I understood precisely where he was coming from.

[AkiKishi]

blacqout wrote...
If you're talking about your personal reaction to the death, then that's a problem with your roleplaying ability.

If you're talking about Hawke's in-game reaction to the death, then that's a problem with your honesty. Because he doesn't say that, not in the implied tone.

I'd say it was a problem with the writing since I have no problem with either of those in other games.

Cutlass Jack wrote...
I'm pretty sure that if my father was dying and my Mother refused to move. I wouldn't wave and say "Have fun you two then. I'm off to join the Wardens." I would put saving my family over all other niceties no matter what the cost.

So when Hawke says whatever it takes to get his mother moving, I understood precisely where he was coming from.

As I recall you get the option to want to stay but get over ruled.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 30 mars 2011 - 11:33 .

[Cutlass Jack]

BobSmith101 wrote...

As I recall you get the option to want to stay but get over ruled.

Like that would really work? Conscription or no the only way my Cousland would have left that room is either by being knocked out and dragged or by getting a promise from Duncan he would do whatever it took to get his mother out of that castle.

Essentially your get signed over to the wardens in return for Duncan doing absolutely nothing. And for logic defying reasons you go along with it.

At least the Hawke scene made sense by comparison. There would be time for mourning and accusations later. Getting his surviving family out of there was the only important thing.

[Zmajc]

Visanideth wrote...

Zmajc wrote...

Maybe this would work out better if you had more than 3 dialogue options.

Also ... what if you select a different answer every dialogue not allways a  fixed "good" "bad" "xyz" answer every time? Because i varied my answers alot  and i didn't feel my hawk develop into any of those distinct personalities.

Another problem i see is that there's basically only 1 fixed ending. Whathever you do, whoever you become
you allways do same fixed decisions game makes for you.

I can't remember how many times i wanted to make a middle ground decision that simply wasn't there or wanted to kill someone i wasn't allowed to. 

Past games had so much more options there.

There are more. You're not getting the system. If your Hawke is flagged "aggressive", when using an aggressive answer you may get something a sarcastic Hawke wouldn't get. My sarcastic mage eventually became clownish even when I picked diplomatic options, and I was quite surprised by seeing my Hawke saying different things in scripted conversations depending on how I was playing him.

You're really, really not getting the system. It's possibly still underdeveloped in points, but it's something downright amazing.

I do get the system the game is just too flawed as a whole for it to shine in it, also let's not forget that they removed all diplomatic skills limiting dialogue options even more.  

Modifié par Zmajc, 30 mars 2011 - 11:55 .

[KennethAFTopp]

DA2 feels more like a game than DA:O did.

[Zmajc]

KennethAFTopp wrote...

DA2 feels more like a game than DA:O did.

What?

[KennethAFTopp]

Zmajc wrote...

KennethAFTopp wrote...

DA2 feels more like a game than DA:O did.

What?

Point was, that DA:o was a much more immersive game. You might disagree, but in the end it's just my opinion.

Modifié par KennethAFTopp, 30 mars 2011 - 12:00 .

[AkiKishi]

Cutlass Jack wrote...
Like that would really work? Conscription or no the only way my Cousland would have left that room is either by being knocked out and dragged or by getting a promise from Duncan he would do whatever it took to get his mother out of that castle.

Essentially your get signed over to the wardens in return for Duncan doing absolutely nothing. And for logic defying reasons you go along with it.

At least the Hawke scene made sense by comparison. There would be time for mourning and accusations later. Getting his surviving family out of there was the only important thing.

If it were just some random Ogre or Darkspawn that would be different go down swinging. But "you" in the case of the Human Noble you had someone to focus your feelings on, there was person behind the attack. Sure you could stay behind and die, or you could live and get payback at a future date. Getting payback sounded like a much more agreeable prospect to me.

[cindercatz]

Visanideth wrote...

I think it's an issue of accessibility and gratification.

Let's make a quick comparison:

- DA:O allowed you to create your character
- Once your character was created, the dialogue options in the entire game were "fixed" (the way you played the game, aside from stacking points in Persuasion, didn't alter your options)
- you could go from ruthless to clowny in the same dialogue with no consequence or continuity
- the only factor influencing dialogue was your Origin story, ie character generation

DA2 has:

- dynamic conversations that evolve depending on how you play your character
- different events depending on the personality you developed for him
- different lines of conversation triggered by the same wheel entry depending on how you played your character till then (same dialogue, aggressive option, an aggressive character may get a different answer from a sarcastic one


Now, it's obvious that in terms of roleplay integration DA2 is miles ahead, not only DA:O but also the competition. The personality you give your character is completely woven in the narrative and gameplay.
Still people feel "chained" by playing Hawke and not "their" character.

The problem is that even if DA2 gives you more freedom and a much, much deeper system of roleplay interaction with characters and events, most players aren't willing to sink that deep. It's a too complex system for most, and it's actually a lot more immediate and acceptable to them to have a character the world doesn't react to, because it allows them to make him exactly what they want.

Basically, the Warden didn't exist in the game. Aside from his race, every NPC in the game reacted to all Wardens across thousands of different playthrough in the same way. By not existing, it could be anything the player wanted.

I think in the mind of many it's a case of "less is more". I violently disagree, and think that the "Hawke system" is the best thing Bioware did in years, but on this point I think I'm in the minority. It's a lot of effort and quality programming that is gonna be wasted on a huge part of the fanbase because they would rather not have a main character and play pretend with their fantasy than having an entire game working around the idea of roleplaying a character they didn't generate.

You're missing the point I think, at least of my post. I understand and applaud what they did with the dialogue wheel. What they did with the set protagonist is another matter. The main thrust of the plot and everything Hawke does, including the Qunari, is either you go pro-mage or anti-mage. Hawke, the set character, has an apostate sister and was raised by an apostate father who was a decent dad, and that's canon. Now, stuck with that origin, the only answer that set character can ever make is "pro-mage", with a little wiggle room for blood magic. The only way for me to really take advantage of that nice wheel convo system is to *not* roleplay. Yeah I can change my tone, my demeanor, which is great, but the second I decide that all of a sudden the templars are right or the Qunari are fully respectable, I've broken my character and my suspension of disbelief.

I believe the multiple origins are essential to the franchise because the complex social systems and emphasis on replayability are built into it, moreso than voice presentation if I had to choose, which I don't. If I want to continue my six vastly different worlds I built in Origins, that I played 500+ hours in and counting, and I want to actually roleplay, that means I'll have to slog through six nearly identical runs of this game, which is even worse than it sounds, because I can't stand the combat and get nothing out of the other game systems.

I don't buy that you can't have both the wheel and multiple origins. Like my first post stated, they should and can integrate origins into this very game through DLC. It's not like NPCs are constantly referring to Bethany or Carver as "Hawke". The player only has to accept that their different PCs have the same VAs. It's not as hard as people make it out to be.

[Cutlass Jack]

BobSmith101 wrote...

If it were just some random Ogre or Darkspawn that would be different go down swinging. But "you" in the case of the Human Noble you had someone to focus your feelings on, there was person behind the attack. Sure you could stay behind and die, or you could live and get payback at a future date. Getting payback sounded like a much more agreeable prospect to me.

You're still missing the more obvious option of dragging your mother out now and getting payback later. Sure she didn't want to go, but she would if the alternative was you staying there until she agreed.  And it would have made for better roleplay. Duncan could have got a vow for me willingly to serve in exchange for helping me to get her out of there. Win-Win.

Modifié par Cutlass Jack, 30 mars 2011 - 12:21 .

[Cutlass Jack]

cindercatz wrote...

You're missing the point I think, at least of my post. I understand and applaud what they did with the dialogue wheel. What they did with the set protagonist is another matter. The main thrust of the plot and everything Hawke does, including the Qunari, is either you go pro-mage or anti-mage. Hawke, the set character, has an apostate sister and was raised by an apostate father who was a decent dad, and that's canon. Now, stuck with that origin, the only answer that set character can ever make is "pro-mage", with a little wiggle room for blood magic. The only way for me to really take advantage of that nice wheel convo system is to *not* roleplay. Yeah I can change my tone, my demeanor, which is great, but the second I decide that all of a sudden the templars are right or the Qunari are fully respectable, I've broken my character and my suspension of disbelief.

Is that any different than in Origins, where every bit of the Dwarf Noble's background screams to back Harrowmont? While the background of the Dwarf Commoner screams to back Bhelen? Yet clearly people have found motivation to go the opposite path.

While there's certainly heavy background reason to go pro-mage in DA2, there is also motivation to back the Templars within the actual story itself. I'll avoid spoilers here, but one of the worst moments in your life during act II shows exactly what happens when you give mages free reign. Not to mention all the other moments of blood mages doing Very Bad Things. So not that hard from a roleplaying standpoint for Hawke to begin to think maybe the chantry is right on some things. My Hawke had serious doubts by the end of act II, even though I was a very pro-mage rogue at the beginning.

Of course I would be negligent if I didn't mention that some Templars also do Very Bad Things. There is evidence to support both sides despite the weight of your backstory. No suspension of disbelief required.

Modifié par Cutlass Jack, 30 mars 2011 - 12:34 .

[AkiKishi]

Cutlass Jack wrote...
You're still missing the more obvious option of dragging your mother out now and getting payback later. Sure she didn't want to go, but she would if the alternative was you staying there until she agreed.  And it would have made for better roleplay. Duncan could have got a vow for me willingly to serve in exchange for helping me to get her out of there. Win-Win.

I respected her choice.

But then Hawke felt too much like a mummies boy to me anyway.

[AkiKishi]

cindercatz wrote...

You're missing the point I think, at least of my post. I understand and applaud what they did with the dialogue wheel. What they did with the set protagonist is another matter. The main thrust of the plot and everything Hawke does, including the Qunari, is either you go pro-mage or anti-mage. Hawke, the set character, has an apostate sister and was raised by an apostate father who was a decent dad, and that's canon. Now, stuck with that origin, the only answer that set character can ever make is "pro-mage", with a little wiggle room for blood magic. The only way for me to really take advantage of that nice wheel convo system is to *not* roleplay. Yeah I can change my tone, my demeanor, which is great, but the second I decide that all of a sudden the templars are right or the Qunari are fully respectable, I've broken my character and my suspension of disbelief.

I believe the multiple origins are essential to the franchise because the complex social systems and emphasis on replayability are built into it, moreso than voice presentation if I had to choose, which I don't. If I want to continue my six vastly different worlds I built in Origins, that I played 500+ hours in and counting, and I want to actually roleplay, that means I'll have to slog through six nearly identical runs of this game, which is even worse than it sounds, because I can't stand the combat and get nothing out of the other game systems.

I don't buy that you can't have both the wheel and multiple origins. Like my first post stated, they should and can integrate origins into this very game through DLC. It's not like NPCs are constantly referring to Bethany or Carver as "Hawke". The player only has to accept that their different PCs have the same VAs. It's not as hard as people make it out to be.

That was how I saw things, the wiggle room was removed by Merril

Cost, unless you use the same voice for each Origin. Or are you talking about multiple "Hawke" orgins?

Modifié par BobSmith101, 30 mars 2011 - 12:55 .

[cindercatz]

Yes, multiple "Hawke" origins. There's no other character consistantly referred to as "Hawke", and the name could just as well be applied to any origin. If your Hawke wasn't related to Bethany et al, then that family is no longer referred to anywhere as "Hawke", only you.

Cutlass Jack wrote...

Is that any different than in Origins, where every bit of the Dwarf Noble's background screams to back Harrowmont? While the background of the Dwarf Commoner screams to back Bhelen? Yet clearly people have found motivation to go the opposite path.

While there's certainly heavy background reason to go pro-mage in DA2, there is also motivation to back the Templars within the actual story itself. I'll avoid spoilers here, but one of the worst moments in your life during act II shows exactly what happens when you give mages free reign. Not to mention all the other moments of blood mages doing Very Bad Things. So not that hard from a roleplaying standpoint for Hawke to begin to think maybe the chantry is right on some things. My Hawke had serious doubts by the end of act II, even though I was a very pro-mage rogue at the beginning.

Of course I would be negligent if I didn't mention that some Templars also do Very Bad Things. There is evidence to support both sides despite the weight of your backstory. No suspension of disbelief required.

Sure there's evidence to both sides, but Hawke already knows what side he's on. Hawke shouldn't be surprised by anything, because Hawke's spent his/her entire life in an apostate family. Hawke should have the emotional weight of his family behind his convictions. Your Hawke could waver, but my Hawke can't flip without breaking the character. And what about the first half of the game?

The dwarven origins, on the other hand, provide you multiple paths each with different incentives to behave in different ways. I decided on my Dwarven noble that I would be sympathetic and a reformist, but also adhere to the dwarven sense of honor, so in the course of one dinner my Dwarven noble agreed to help the topsiders regain their names and then ended up exiled forever because the man he agreed to support had attempted to injure his family station and was publicly humiliated, and he later had to negotiate his son's future because of that roleplay decision. I played according to a personality and value system that I both chose and was encouraged by the game's reaction to my decisions. You could end up supporting Harrowmont, but what if you had earlier engaged in the same kind of byzantine politics yourself, as the game gave you ample opportunity to? You might decide differently.

The origins helped you define your character through roleplay, rather than defining him or her for you. This game defines Hawke for you and then allows you to fill in the gaps. It can be much improved through integration of origins.

Modifié par cindercatz, 30 mars 2011 - 01:22 .

[Cutlass Jack]

cindercatz wrote...

Sure there's evidence to both sides, but Hawke already knows what side he's on. Hawke shouldn't be surprised by anything, because Hawke's spent his/her entire life in an apostate family. Hawke should have the emotional weight of his family behind his convictions. Your Hawke could waver, but my Hawke can't flip without breaking the character. And what about the first half of the game?

The dwarven origins, on the other hand, provide you multiple paths each with different incentives to behave in different ways. I decided on my Dwarven noble that I would be sympathetic and a reformist, but also adhere to the dwarven sense of honor, so in the course of one dinner my Dwarven noble agreed to help the topsiders regain their names and then ended up exiled forever because the man he agreed to support had attempted to injure his family station and was publicly humiliated, and he later had to negotiate his son's future because of that roleplay decision. I played according to a personality and value system that I both chose and was encouraged by the game's reaction to my decisions. You could end up supporting Harrowmont, but what if you had earlier engaged in the same kind of byzantine politics yourself, as the game gave you ample opportunity to? You might decide differently.

The origins helped you define your character through roleplay, rather than defining him or her for you. This game defines Hawke for you and then allows you to fill in the gaps. It can be much improved through integration of origins.

There is really no difference whatsoever between the Dwarven backgrounds and Hawkes. Hawke has much emotional weight for being against magic based on what it did to his family. There is direct evidience for not supporting the mages directly within the story. You might have missed it, but I can't get into it based on the forum this is on unfortunately.  Especially in a non spoiler tagged topic.

It might break your character to go in that direction, but that doesn't mean that one character is the only way to go.

Modifié par Cutlass Jack, 30 mars 2011 - 01:27 .

[fn_outlaw]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

As I recall you get the option to want to stay but get over ruled.

Like that would really work? Conscription or no the only way my Cousland would have left that room is either by being knocked out and dragged or by getting a promise from Duncan he would do whatever it took to get his mother out of that castle.

Essentially your get signed over to the wardens in return for Duncan doing absolutely nothing. And for logic defying reasons you go along with it.

At least the Hawke scene made sense by comparison. There would be time for mourning and accusations later. Getting his surviving family out of there was the only important thing.

Duncan told the KING.  Who, IMO, would be THE authority on getting the revenge you seek.  Just saying, he did do something, it just turned out to not matter cause everyone was going to die.

As far as not being able to fathom leaving your mom and dad to die, well, that's you're own imaginative issue.

IE.  IMO, I can't see how Hawke lets his/her brother/sister die WITHOUT shedding a tear.  I mean I get it that they were pressed and had to go, but at least the Warden's face (when departing his/her parents) was indicative of sadness.

[Cutlass Jack]

fn_outlaw wrote...

Duncan told the KING.  Who, IMO, would be THE authority on getting the revenge you seek.  Just saying, he did do something, it just turned out to not matter cause everyone was going to die.

As far as not being able to fathom leaving your mom and dad to die, well, that's you're own imaginative issue.

IE.  IMO, I can't see how Hawke lets his/her brother/sister die WITHOUT shedding a tear.  I mean I get it that they were pressed and had to go, but at least the Warden's face (when departing his/her parents) was indicative of sadness.

Looking sad when you could have done something isn't very meaningful. Your mother only died because you left her there to do so. Duncan telling the king, when he could have done something as well, isn't much consolation.

Steeling yourself over a situation you could do nothing about, in order to save those still living is another story. You'll note Hawke did not leave his mother there to die with Carver. Realistically, she resented him for it.

I do get that everyone didn't have the same issues with the Cousland backstory that I did. But I drew the comparison because I think Hawke dealt with the same situation much better.

[cindercatz]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

There is really no difference whatsoever between the Dwarven backgrounds and Hawkes. Hawke has much emotional weight for being against magic based on what it did to his family. There is direct evidience for not supporting the mages directly within the story. You might have missed it, but I can't get into it based on the forum this is on unfortunately.  Especially in a non spoiler tagged topic.

It might break your character to go in that direction, but that doesn't mean that one character is the only way to go.

The difference is that the DA:O origins do not prescribe any position or personality onto your character, but instead encourage you to develope along your own path within the context of the world around you, allowing for wildly different and wholly consistent characters, and the origins themselves help you to build your character, and this continues throughout the game.

Also, there's SIX !! of them, all unique.

Hawke's demeanor is up for grabs, but the rest requires you to displace the character if you in fact want to build multiple characters who take multiple paths. Magic, Hawke should know throughout, does nothing, only the mage. There's even a family chit-chat about this subject in the game, which really, again, should only go one way.

I can surely play multiple characters, but each of them will really be intentional distortions of that same pre-set guy/gal. Playing it, this is probably the worst thing about the game after the tap tap tap battle system. I have to actively break my immersion on subsequent playthroughs to do any significant thing differently than I have thus far (outside of the romances).

Modifié par cindercatz, 30 mars 2011 - 02:21 .

[Cutlass Jack]

cindercatz wrote...

The difference is that the DA:O origins do not prescribe any position or personality onto your character, but instead encourage you to develope along your own path within the context of the world around you, allowing for wildly different and wholly consistent characters, and the origins themselves help you to build your character, and this continues throughout the game.

Also, there's SIX !! of them, all unique.

Hawke's demeanor is up for grabs, but the rest requires you to displace the character if you in fact want to build multiple characters who take multiple paths. Magic, Hawke should know throughout, does nothing, only the mage. There's even a family chit-chat about this subject in the game, which really, again, should only go one way.

I can surely play multiple characters, but each of them will really be intentional distortions of that same pre-set guy/gal. Playing it, this is probably the worst thing about the game after the tap tap tap battle system. I have to actively break my immersion on subsequent playthroughs to do any significant thing differently than I have thus far (outside of the romances).

The difference is there is no difference. You were not forced to any personality or position in DA2. You forced them on yourself. Your background is just a starting point. Same as Origins.

Does magic do nothing? Seems to me no matter how much you like the mage, all it takes is one small slip to become a monster. Just one. There were certainly enough examples of this throughout the story to make Hawke sympathetic to controlling the problem. Not to 'Tranquil solution' levels, of course. But he could see the need for the Templars without any break of character whatsoever.

Yes there were six different origins, but lets be honest here. Past Ostragar, the differences between them were minimal. Meanwhile Hawke has 3 different personality types that further vary by gender, class, game choices and friendship/rivalry status on an individual basis with every companion.

Thats quite a bit of room for variation and growth. But really both games were guilty of the same things you accuse this one of. You can either take your background as gospel and never vary from it or pick your own path. But if you can't see that, there's really no point in arguing it.

I do sympathize on the tap tap tap part though. I could never play these games on console.

[MonkeyLungs]

DTKT wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

DTKT wrote...

Mavkiel wrote...

I have nothing against the character, nor the plot. The game however really was to short. The game breaking and quest breaking bugs also ruined my enjoyment.

Introducing characters with, "Remember me, we worked on job x together". Is also a big immersion killer. No, I dont remember them, because I never met the bloody person before. They pulled that at least three times.

Glad I'm not the only one who was slightly annoyed by that thing.

It was a really strange design. How do you expect the player to figure out how you know that random NPC if he has never met him before? If felt incredibly artificial.

It made me question why it was even included. It was one cutscene that added nothing to the meat of the story.

Hahaha.

Made my night.

It makes me wonder why Bioware didnt add an intro sequence in Lothering. Not too much content. Maybe a few quests. Maybe a few tutorials?

Create something with your mother, sister and brother. Fallout did something similar. You started as a child in the vault, went through your anniversary, the SPECIAL test and finally when you exit the Vault.  A similar flow could have been used for DAII. It would have helped tremendously with the flow and how attached you are to the NPC's.

Because honestly, I didnt give a damn about my mother or my sister. The comical death scene of your sibling also doesnt help.

They wanted you to EXPLODE enemies with your sword RIGHT AWAY!!!!!!!!

[KennethAFTopp]

yes and avoid all that horrible character creation stuff

[Dragoonlordz]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

cindercatz wrote...

Sure there's evidence to both sides, but Hawke already knows what side he's on. Hawke shouldn't be surprised by anything, because Hawke's spent his/her entire life in an apostate family. Hawke should have the emotional weight of his family behind his convictions. Your Hawke could waver, but my Hawke can't flip without breaking the character. And what about the first half of the game?

The dwarven origins, on the other hand, provide you multiple paths each with different incentives to behave in different ways. I decided on my Dwarven noble that I would be sympathetic and a reformist, but also adhere to the dwarven sense of honor, so in the course of one dinner my Dwarven noble agreed to help the topsiders regain their names and then ended up exiled forever because the man he agreed to support had attempted to injure his family station and was publicly humiliated, and he later had to negotiate his son's future because of that roleplay decision. I played according to a personality and value system that I both chose and was encouraged by the game's reaction to my decisions. You could end up supporting Harrowmont, but what if you had earlier engaged in the same kind of byzantine politics yourself, as the game gave you ample opportunity to? You might decide differently.

The origins helped you define your character through roleplay, rather than defining him or her for you. This game defines Hawke for you and then allows you to fill in the gaps. It can be much improved through integration of origins.

There is really no difference whatsoever between the Dwarven backgrounds and Hawkes. Hawke has much emotional weight for being against magic based on what it did to his family. There is direct evidience for not supporting the mages directly within the story. You might have missed it, but I can't get into it based on the forum this is on unfortunately.  Especially in a non spoiler tagged topic.

It might break your character to go in that direction, but that doesn't mean that one character is the only way to go.

DAO: You (the player) if human noble decided the fate of the person who killed your family at a later stage in game.
DA2: You (the player) has no choice what happens to the person who killed your family member.

Repeat this for around 1000 times at various stages of the game and there's the difference. You may prefer DA2, but I prefer DAO this reason and a truly vast amount more reasons. Such is life but there is a difference.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 30 mars 2011 - 03:45 .