41 réponses à ce sujet

[DeffFace]

 Having completed the game, and ghosted these forums reading people's thoughts for a week now, it's clear that although some like the game and some do not, everyone agrees there are "plot holes", or rather specific stories, character appearances, or Hawke actions that either don't make sense in the context of the Dragon Age Canon, or don't make sense logically. After some thought, I realized the issues players are having over these may be the result of DAII being a "framed narrative", rather than the sort of games we normally play, where the story has no narrator. I've developed a fairly simple theory to explain these issues. My argument runs like this:

1. Bioware writers and designers are good at their jobs and know a lot about the IP.
2. Varric (as a narrator) has strong motivations to lie to the Seeker.
3. Therefore, certain plot holes, inconsistentcies, etc. are best explained by the conclusion that they didn't happen as seen (or played) in DAII.


1. This (I thought) would be obvious, but perhaps bears some justification in light of all the negative opinions and "Fire this guy" petitions. This is a company that has made many of the best computer RPGs ever, and they've been doing it for a long time. Getting a job writing for them isn't easy (especially in a competitive job market like this). If a writer couldn't craft a good story/quest/character, or stick to the IP, they'd be writing fan fiction in their basement, not making good money writing for a AAA game's developer.

2. This bears more discussion. One, Varric has shown a penchant for lying, running the spectrum from mere exageration (Bethany's chest), to outright lies (his handling of the family business and it's fronts, his attempts to hide Bartrand's Idol from the Seeker, etc.). Lying is something he does all the time. Two, he's clearly very intellegent, very informed, and self-interested (the guy's "profession" is listed as Spymaster). He's got the tools to make stuff up and manipulate people. Three, he's clearly very interested in and invested in Hawke. Whether he's a friend or rival, he spends YEARS following Hawke around, working with and for Hawke, and calling on Hawke's help in the direst of situations (like revenge against his brother). This suggests that whatever his specific motivation, he could very reasonably have the motivation to lie to someone seeking Hawke, whether to prevent them from finding Hawke, or knowing the truth about Hawke, or whatever.

3. Given 1 and 2, inconsistencies in DAII's story can be explained as Varric making stuff up. Insufficient motivation for getting involved in Kirkwall's affairs? You're right, maybe Varric was hiding something. EVERY mage going to blood magic and possession against the crazed Templars? Maybe he's exaggerating how far gone both sides of the conflict were. This can go for a ton of things discussed on these forums, and provides a new way of looking at the entire game.

We're used to playing games with no narrator, where whatever we do/say, etc. is what REALLY happened in the story. In DAII, we're relying on Varric, a known liar with motivation to keep the truth from the Seeker (who is really US, the person learning the story), to tells us what REALLY happened with Hawke's story. As such, the events of DAII need to be viewed through the lens of "How much can we really trust Varric's story?". 

[hoorayforicecream]

No-prize for you.

[Alex Kershaw]

This makes as much sense to me as having a 10 minute game and saying that Varric died of a heart attack, or not being able to talk to any characters because Varric can't remember what Hawke actually said. The primary concern is making a good game, and if something gets in the way of that, it needs to be removed. Varric's storytelling is the reason, but is not a valid excuse.

[Nathan Redgrave]

Somehow, I doubt any of the plot-holes are intentional.

[brain_damage]

That's a poor excuse for plot holes the size of the moon.

[Jman5]

Saying Varric was lying is a cop-out of all cop-outs. It's up there with: It was just a dream!!

Granted there are small things put in there for comic relief or tutorial, but it's safe to say that everything outside the obvious is canon.

[Deztyn]

It would be a good explanation if it was supported more in game. More moments like Varric's one man army scene where it's clear he's either exaggerating or doesn't remember exactly how it happened. As it stands I'm not willing to use Varric as a pass for everything I thought was done poorly. Though I did assume from the beginning that the framed narrative would be how inconsistencies would be explained in future games.

[Ngoctu]

what you see as Plot Hole I see it as "great base for DLC"

I think they made this game starting from 2 ideas
a) Dragon Age world
DLC

they create a base quickly in 2 year and that for the next 3/4 year will be the base for DLC (quick cash) untill people grow old of the story and they will come out with DA:3 (hopefully with at least 4 year of develpoment)

DA:II is a transiction and they had to make it quick and what best way to create a base for a DLC system not a story with an end (a la DA:O) but just the first chatper of a longer story.

I see DA:II as act-1 of the real DA:II that will be the add up of DA:II+DLC1+DLC2+DLC3...

only thing i feel to complain about is that they should have sold it for 39.90 because is not the full story but i love DA:II more then DA:O to be honest (and i am back playing DA:O once again because i wanna do a full run but honestly DA:O is actually boring me more now then DA:II did)

Modifié par Ngoctu, 01 avril 2011 - 08:35 .

[DeffFace]

Jman5 wrote...

Saying Varric was lying is a cop-out of all cop-outs. It's up there with: It was just a dream!!

Granted there are small things put in there for comic relief or tutorial, but it's safe to say that everything outside the obvious is canon.

Why is it safe to say this? Seriously, why? Because Varric said so? This is a narrated story, so the believability of the narrator affects the believability of the story.

Also, I'm not suggesting anyone should take everything they thought was wrong with the game and ignore it because "Varric probably made it up". I'm saying people should take the narrator into account when thinking about what the story ACTUALLY is as opposed to what we played.

"There's power in stories, though. That's all history is: the best tales. The ones that last. Might as well be mine." -- Varric[/i]

[Romudeth]

Great post DeffFace.

I agree with you that the majority of people are not taking into account the fact that most of DA2 may be a complete lie. I think this is actually one of the best parts of DA2. I don't recall the last time I've played a game where I had to question the authenticity of the story due to a narrator who is a known liar. I freakin' love this and it's going to be interesting to find out the real version of some of these stories via dlc.

To Ngoctu:
I hope your theory is correct. If DA3 comes out in about 2-5 years while dlc for DA2 keeps us sated would be a very good thing indeed. I liked DA2 over DAO but even I have to admit that DA2 is an undercooked game. Give DA3 the time it needs to be the most spectacular high fantasy WRPG of this generation and give us DA2 dlc during the time it takes to make DA3.

[Curlain]

Romudeth wrote...

Great post DeffFace.

I agree with you that the majority of people are not taking into account the fact that most of DA2 may be a complete lie. I think this is actually one of the best parts of DA2. I don't recall the last time I've played a game where I had to question the authenticity of the story due to a narrator who is a known liar. I freakin' love this and it's going to be interesting to find out the real version of some of these stories via dlc.

To Ngoctu:
I hope your theory is correct. If DA3 comes out in about 2-5 years while dlc for DA2 keeps us sated would be a very good thing indeed. I liked DA2 over DAO but even I have to admit that DA2 is an undercooked game. Give DA3 the time it needs to be the most spectacular high fantasy WRPG of this generation and give us DA2 dlc during the time it takes to make DA3.

It would depend on the story or game though.  In an RPG game, to find out that everything you had done (or significant parts of it) outright didn't happen invalidates (in my opinion of course) the point of playing it.  Everything you do is invalidated, so taking on a role, making choices and companion interact becomes meaningless if you find out it's all a lie and never happened

[Lord Gremlin]

This makes sense.
Think about it... Imagine Hawke haven't killed all those blood mages, but sided with them and they set a base camp in the mountains. What if a pride demon lived in Hawke's estate, disguised as an elven servant and Varric knew?
Would he tell it to the Seeker? Especially if Hawke wanted him to be silent? Or maybe it's wise to say that blood mages were killed and make a Tevinter slave out of pride demon? Just to be safe.

Or one day he meets Hawke in dark alley and she says "Varric, duuude... I told you to keep your trap shut, but noooey, you HAD to tell a Seeker everything, you blabbermouth. I'm afraid you'll have to contribute some blood to our cause now. And by "some" I mean "all"."
Pff, why am I imagining the story again? Isn't it DA writer's job?

[Ngoctu]

I hope your theory is correct. If DA3 comes out in about 2-5 years while dlc for DA2 keeps us sated would be a very good thing indeed. I liked DA2 over DAO but even I have to admit that DA2 is an undercooked game. Give DA3 the time it needs to be the most spectacular high fantasy WRPG of this generation and give us DA2 dlc during the time it takes to make DA3.

that's exactly what i hope... and it feels like that hopefully.

[Mahtisonni]

brain_damage wrote...

That's a poor excuse for plot holes the size of the moon.

That's no moon...

[DeffFace]

Lord Gremlin wrote...

This makes sense.
Think about it... Imagine Hawke haven't killed all those blood mages, but sided with them and they set a base camp in the mountains. What if a pride demon lived in Hawke's estate, disguised as an elven servant and Varric knew?
Would he tell it to the Seeker? Especially if Hawke wanted him to be silent? Or maybe it's wise to say that blood mages were killed and make a Tevinter slave out of pride demon? Just to be safe.

Or one day he meets Hawke in dark alley and she says "Varric, duuude... I told you to keep your trap shut, but noooey, you HAD to tell a Seeker everything, you blabbermouth. I'm afraid you'll have to contribute some blood to our cause now. And by "some" I mean "all"."
Pff, why am I imagining the story again? Isn't it DA writer's job?

Yes... it COULD get really ridiculous. It could end up like a giant retcon, or where the whole of DAII would turn out to be pointless. I somehow doubt Bioware would do that though, don't you?

I could see the first Act of DAIII (or a DAII expansion), being about setting in stone what really happened in Kirkwall though.

Ultimately, I'm not sure WHAT they are going to do, and that's exciting. Every RPG I've ever played just started off with the character, doing whatever, moving the story ahead. Here, I'm not entirely sure just what Hawke really did, where she really is, or who went with her. It's up in the air, waiting to be set in stone. That's cool and exciting (I think), and certainly different from other RPGs. 

Bioware is (assuming I'm right with my "Varric as an untruthful narrator" idea) pushing the boundaries of video game story telling here, and that's pretty cool. 

Modifié par DeffFace, 01 avril 2011 - 09:58 .

[Darth Obvious]

The whole "framed narrative" was utterly pointless, and was just a waste of time.

It didn't even make sense. At first Varric is dragged against his will to the interrogation area (so you're thinking that he really must have done something wrong), and then later it's like "well I guess you can go, then." Why do the Seekers even bother asking him what happened? The story was shallow and uninteresting, and Cassandra could easily have gathered the information from anyone regardless.

They act like it's some big mystery as to what happened, when any idiot in Kirkwall could have said "Yeah, so Hawke killed the Arishok, and while everyone was worried that the Qunari would return for a bloodbath, some crazy old lady got possessed by some stupid idol thing that no one understands, and then the mages and templars got into a fight. It was lame."

Where's the mystery? Why act like there is some secret to uncover by interrogating Varric?

That entire narrative felt very forced, and it is obvious that the game was rushed for release before the trained monkeys at Bioware could think of a better story.

[Deztyn]

The secret was that the most important person in the whole wide world wasn't very important after all. Wrong place, wrong time, wrong friends. Did her best to make money and not die. The real question is why they thought that would make a good story.

Anyway, saying "It's Varric telling the story!" Is just a fancy way of saying "It's Bioware writing the story!" So I don't understand why that should be an acceptable excuse for people unhappy with the narrative.

[TJPags]

The OP is a well thought out, interesting post. It does make a kind of sense.

However, using "Varric lied" as an explanation for plot holes is pretty weak, IMO. It's a "get out of jail free" card for lazy writing.

Now, I'm not ready to say Bioware intended to use it as such, nor am I implying anyone is saying they should. But if I do see an excuse of "Varric lied" for some apparent lore/timeline/gameplay issue, I'll be very annoyed.

[Sammyjb]

TJPags wrote...

The OP is a well thought out, interesting post. It does make a kind of sense.

However, using "Varric lied" as an explanation for plot holes is pretty weak, IMO. It's a "get out of jail free" card for lazy writing.

Now, I'm not ready to say Bioware intended to use it as such, nor am I implying anyone is saying they should. But if I do see an excuse of "Varric lied" for some apparent lore/timeline/gameplay issue, I'll be very annoyed.

This. If they retcon not killing/killing Anders by saying Varric lied, I shall be very mad.

[LadyJaneGrey]

TJPags wrote...

But if I do see an excuse of "Varric lied" for some apparent lore/timeline/gameplay issue, I'll be very annoyed.

I'm with you.

Still, would you find the "Varric lied" excuse more annoying than a game contradicting the epilogue slides?  When I finished DAII and received no detailed information on the aftermath, my first thought was "oh.; I guess the writers no longer wanted to juggle the different consequences of player choices.  Maybe there will be fewer contradictions in future content?"

[Talladarr]

Personally, I'm pissed about Leliana's involvement in DA2 as it is. I mean, you can kill her in DA:O(And I did a decapitation move once when I did that) She's f*ckin dead. How the F*CK is she leading the Seekers?!?

[Maverick827]

I'd accept Varric-as-unreliable-narrator in a few instances, but I would have to see which and how they were tied up to pass judgment. It could easily grow out of hand, and it is certainly not a catch-all for any perceived plot hole (though I also doubt that so-called plot holes are actually plot holes).

[TJPags]

LadyJaneGrey wrote...

TJPags wrote...

But if I do see an excuse of "Varric lied" for some apparent lore/timeline/gameplay issue, I'll be very annoyed.

I'm with you.

Still, would you find the "Varric lied" excuse more annoying than a game contradicting the epilogue slides?  When I finished DAII and received no detailed information on the aftermath, my first thought was "oh.; I guess the writers no longer wanted to juggle the different consequences of player choices.  Maybe there will be fewer contradictions in future content?"

You know, I'm not sure.

I AM annoyed at the "epilogues are rumor and hearsay" thing (which is why it's in my sig).  Those epilogues, while they certainly didn't answer every question, did give a kind of ending to the game, a character wrap up, something to let me see what my choices meant for various people.  Hearing that they don't count, well, bothers me.

Would "Varric lied" be more annoying?  Might be a case by case basis.  I mean, if he lied about, say, who Hawke romanced . . .meh, won't bother me much.  Or what order Hawke did something in.  But if he "lied" about, say, Hawke killing Anders . . . .yea, I'd pretty much lose my mind at that point.

And yes, I AM annoyed at the "Leliana is always alive" thing.  Now, I never even took the option to kill her, so it doesn't even effect my game.  But the fact that they will give a player the option to do something, and then simply say "yea, sorry, that didn't happen" bothers the HELL out of me.  It's laziness, or confusion, or a failure to look ahead on their part.  They've indicated there might be an explanation - I say so what.

"maker saved her" = "ashes saved her" = "mountain of lyrium saved her" = "Varric lied" = cheap way of fixing mistakes.

[DeffFace]

TJPags wrote...

"maker saved her" = "ashes saved her" = "mountain of lyrium saved her" = "Varric lied" = cheap way of fixing mistakes.

My point in this is to make you question whether something that LOOKS like a mistake, actually IS a mistake, or done on purpose, perhaps with an explanation that hasn't been seen yet.

I could be totally wrong here, but I don't believe that at Bioware, while making the game, no one noticed (for example) that the timeline with Anders is a bit off, or that, "Hey, isn't Leiliana dead for a lot of players?". Further, I don't believe that they just said, "F it, retcon with no explanation." or, "Screw it if it doesn't make sense with the IP that we've invested a TON of time, money, man hours, and credibility creating, let's just rush this thing out the door so fanboi gamerz will buy it.". So, I'm trying to think of what those explanations might be. Varric making stuff up is one such, although it doesn't (hopefully) cover every inconsistency.

But hey, maybe Bioware will prove my faith in their abilities misplaced. Until then, a pile of absurdly excellent games has earned them the benefit of the doubt, especially when there are other explanations available.

[LadyJaneGrey]

On the positive side...the player can now play the "Varric lied" card too.  I knew the mage boon had a snowball's chance in h*** of being honored in this game, and I could see that making sense according to the lore.
Still, when Alistair told Merrill that the whole give-land-to-the-Dalish boon hadn't worked out yet I felt cheated.  Sure I could sit here and come up with reasons: needs more time, etc.  But, at some point, I need to feel like my choices made an impact.  So I decided Varric was misinformed on that point.  :innocent: