72 réponses à ce sujet

[Another_Golden_Dragon]

The four choices I would like to have had:

Side with Templars
Side with Mages
Destroy both, become Viscount by will of the people (or by their fear)
Simply take LI and run away. Those two want to destoy Kirkwall, let them do it without me.

[ISpeakTheTruth]

After seeing how completely crazy Kirkwall was I honestly wish there was a Cartman option to go back to Fereldan.

"Screw you guys I'm going home."

[Danjaru]

Yes, a Cartman choice: "Screw you guys... I'm going home"..

[DaVeO52]

I especially thought we'd get this choice considering that conversation with Varric when he asked what my future plans were. I said politics, I thought that would lead to something...

[Apollo Starflare]

Another_Golden_Dragon wrote...

The four choices I would like to have had:

Side with Templars
Side with Mages
Destroy both, become Viscount by will of the people (or by their fear)
Simply take LI and run away. Those two want to destoy Kirkwall, let them do it without me.

From what I gather the latter two options sort of happen anyway, just connected to the former two. If you side with the Mages I believe you can go on the run? And I believe you become Viscount of you side with the Templars (the majority of the citizenry supporting the Chantry anyway). Although I did find that whether you become Viscount or not is a little unclear, I seem to remember seeing it confirmed somewhere that you do though.

I don't neccesarily disagree that you should have had an option of doing things for yourself/your family and friends though. However I would point out that expecting a choice to run away and skip the final boss fight was never going to happen, just like it wasn't an option in Origins.

[Another_Golden_Dragon]

Meh. I didn't say not fight them. Just not agree to help them. End game fight right there. Both Supergirl Meredith and the Harvester-thing abomination at once.

[Apollo Starflare]

Another_Golden_Dragon wrote...

Meh. I didn't say not fight them. Just not agree to help them. End game fight right there. Both Supergirl Meredith and the Harvester-thing abomination at once.

You sort of implied it when you said run away I thought, why would they bother chasing you or otherwise interfering when they have each other to beat on? And you end up fighting them both anyway, if you mean at the same time then they would be attacking each other as well and well... it gets messy from a scripting perspective. I'm certainly in favour of a 'me and my friends and family against the world' sort of scenario, I just don't see it fitting in with what was there without some major re-writing. Mainly in regards to the Mages motivation in attacking you should you go it alone.

If they don't then it's essentially the same as supporting the mages, but it might have still been nice to have that option with some tweaks to the plot.

[Sanguinerin]

A third choice could have been interesting here, but honestly I'm too caught up in at least calling for second choices throughout the entirety of the game to worry about an instance that does have two!

[TheBlackBaron]

KJandrew wrote...

I came up with a better idea. Take a leaf out of Eric Cartman's book and just say
"Screw you guys i'm going home"

Yes, this. 

So, King Alistair, I hear you need some help with Orlais, and the Warden isn't back from mirror world with Morrigan yet...

[FedericoV]

That's what I would have choosen if I got the option. The absence of the third choice is the main weakness of act.3. But I suppose that they could not allow a third choice since they spent so much time to depict both templars and mages in such an ugly way, that neutrality would have been the default option of 99% of players (despite the consequences).

Modifié par FedericoV, 02 avril 2011 - 01:13 .

[Kartikeya]

Here's the thing:

Sometimes there is no third option. At least, no third option that would viable in that situation. Sometimes you can't play the neutral card or refuse to choose a side, because refusing to choose means no one's going to be having your back either.

This idea that Hawke should have just singlehandedly destroyed both forces is ignoring a major theme of this game, in that the legendary Champion was a real flesh and blood human being with human limitations (at least, to the extent of storyline and gameplay segregation, anyway. Being a regular Joe who died permanently from a single arrow would not make for fun gameplay). People do things outside of Hawke's (and therefore the player's) control. Hawke's as caught up in this inevitable hurricane as anyone. Hawke is not capable of singlehandedly taking on two armies at once with only the help of her small handful of allies (some of whom would, as with the other choices, not necessarily go along with this idea anyway) no matter how many bandit waves you wipe out.

The option to try and get wiped out might have been amusing if it weren't for the frame narrative.

It seems like most of the criticism I see regarding choice in this game (and don't get me wrong, there are very valid criticisms to be made about the range of choice) boil down less to 'I couldn't choose' and more to 'I couldn't force things to go the way I wanted them to go'. The world does not bend to Hawke's whim, specifically less so than it does in a lot of other games. A lot of folks don't like that.

[Bayz]

My choices would be:

1 Side with mages

2 Side with Templars

3 www.youtube.com/watch

[KJandrew]

@ Kartikeya but siding with the Templar or Mages you have to fight both sides anyway, cutting your way through most of their armies. And how does Hawke have human limitations? he/she cuts his/her way though waves upon waves of enemies with only three allies on a daily basis.

[Ziggeh]

While there are only two actions, I believe think they can be taken in a couple of ways.

I made the decision purely on the basis of protection. I felt that protecting the few now (mages from annulment) put the many at risk later (retaliation and a potential exalted march), but that still wouldn't have made it moral.

[Ziggeh]

Kartikeya wrote...

Sometimes there is no third option. At least, no third option that would viable in that situation. Sometimes you can't play the neutral card or refuse to choose a side, because refusing to choose means no one's going to be having your back either......
.....Hawke is not capable of singlehandedly taking on two armies at once with only the help of her small handful of allies (some of whom would, as with the other choices, not necessarily go along with this idea anyway) no matter how many bandit waves you wipe out.

Proclaiming "nuts to this" and going for a brew in the hanged man could have been an option, Meredith takes that out of your hands, but not really for any reason (beyond power, narrative causality and being generally barmey).

And they would have largely been preoccupied smacking each other, Hawke could have waited until each little group finished up and butchered the survivors.

Modifié par Ziggeh, 02 avril 2011 - 02:09 .

[Apollo Starflare]

Ziggeh wrote...

While there are only two actions, I believe think they can be taken in a couple of ways.

I made the decision purely on the basis of protection. I felt that protecting the few now (mages from annulment) put the many at risk later (retaliation and a potential exalted march), but that still wouldn't have made it moral.

Good point and I made the decision for a very similar reason; with the added reasoning that Meredith wasn't completely barmy, the various citizens of Kirkwall caught in the middle would blame the Mages as well and I could only see more killing and destruction coming from a Mage victory. Particularly as they had proven time and again that at least some of them were more than willing to resort to blood magic to achieve their goals.

I also thought (and rightly so it turned out) that going along with the Templars would mean I could attempt to curb the extent of the annulment through using my reputation as Champion to overrule Meredith.

There are definitely a number of ways you can look at the decision.

With that said I would love to have been able to just take my loyal companions and hole up in the Hanged Man for the duration. Epic game of strip poker ahoy, everyones invited.

[Kartikeya]

KJandrew wrote...

@ Kartikeya but siding with the Templar or Mages you have to fight both sides anyway, cutting your way through most of their armies. And how does Hawke have human limitations? he/she cuts his/her way though waves upon waves of enemies with only three allies on a daily basis.

To the last, see what I already said about storyline and gameplay segregation. You're able to cut your way through those waves of enemies with only three allies because the game is balanced that way. It would be a pretty bad game if it wasn't, and fighting only one dude at a time with a fair chance of dying would be boring. Hawke is not the kind of protagonist who, in the story, can singlehandedly destroy armies, despite what Varric might have been saying down at the pub.

And you fight Templars when you side with the Templars? Really? Crazyface Meredith aside, being as she's, well, crazyface. You fight the mages because they've gone abomination and summoned loads of demons that don't care if you're on their side or not. You don't cut through 'most of their armies'. Have a look at how many Templars are filling up the Gallows during the end sequence.

[Ziggeh]

Apollo Starflare wrote...
Good point and I made the decision for a very similar reason; with the added reasoning that Meredith wasn't completely barmy, the various citizens of Kirkwall caught in the middle would blame the Mages as well and I could only see more killing and destruction coming from a Mage victory. Particularly as they had proven time and again that at least some of them were more than willing to resort to blood magic to achieve their goals.

Aye, that's very close to the decision I nearly made. I just couldn't see my Hawke being quite that pragmatic (my warden would have been all over it). If the mages had been aggressive at that point, been a bit "bring it, churchy" or had already started opening veins I would have been right there.

[Cthulhu.Dreams]

The problem is both sides are retarded:

The mages have super powers, but the templars won't let them use said super powers to..say.. heal people. Start a free clinic you horrible monkeys. Then the mages would be less depressed, because they'd see that they could use their powers for good, not evil! And so would the citizenry! And people get real medical care! Win/Win/Win. Muppets, the lot of them.

The mages on the other hand resort to mass murder the microsecond they are unsupervised. Because they are nut cases? Anyway, do both.

Edit: Maybe a good 'third way' choice would be kill everyone become autocratic dictactor, both mages and chantry rebel against you, all goes to hell.

Modifié par Cthulhu.Dreams, 02 avril 2011 - 02:33 .

[Apollo Starflare]

Ziggeh wrote...

Apollo Starflare wrote...
Good point and I made the decision for a very similar reason; with the added reasoning that Meredith wasn't completely barmy, the various citizens of Kirkwall caught in the middle would blame the Mages as well and I could only see more killing and destruction coming from a Mage victory. Particularly as they had proven time and again that at least some of them were more than willing to resort to blood magic to achieve their goals.

Aye, that's very close to the decision I nearly made. I just couldn't see my Hawke being quite that pragmatic (my warden would have been all over it). If the mages had been aggressive at that point, been a bit "bring it, churchy" or had already started opening veins I would have been right there.

I think what settled it for my Hawke was that in the time between act 2 and 3 I felt he had put himself in the position of protecting Kirkwall. He had lost almost his entire family, in my mind he saw Kirkwall as one of the last things he had left to protect (along with his closest friends). This, plus the fact Meredith hadn't clearly manipulated him or been completely wrong led to him siding with the established law and hoping he could mitigate the damage.

Because my Bethany died in the Deep Roads he didn't really have someone pushing him to side with the Mages either (Anders was hardly in his good books), even Merrill agrees with your decision if you have completed her friendship or rivalry path.

[Arppis]

Not a night goes by that I wouldn't think about a third choice... *sigh*

"Well if you guys want to fight, go ahead and fight, but leave me out of it!" or

"Well, I guess I'll just have to kill you all then!"

"Alright, I'll asume control of this city now. I'll order you two to stop fighting and go back to your rooms!"

Something like this, or some elaborate diplomatic line that would hold the fragile peace together.

Modifié par Arppis, 02 avril 2011 - 02:37 .

[Ziggeh]

Cthulhu.Dreams wrote...

The mages have super powers, but the templars won't let them use said super powers to..say.. heal people.

When they're telling you that Arl Eamon is ill in Origins, they say that he was even beyond the help of magic, so presumably they had a go, and it says in the codex somewhere that templars keep a particularly close eye on spirit healers, who one assumes aren't just dealing with the occasionally grazed knee.

[sth128]

So you want the options to be:
1. Genocide
2. Genocide
3. More Genocide
4. Walk away

Seriously? That's your idea of "more options"? Frankly if you want another option then it should consist of actions DIFFERENT from the ones offered. For example, convincing Cullen and the Templars to rail against Meredith, without the need to invoke the right of annulment; or discovering Orsino's secret and convince Meredith that Orsino is the true source of corruption.

This isn't *bleep* GTA, where the best solution is to take a semi-auto and gun down everybody. I mean, why stop at the Mages and Templars? Lots of Kirkwallers hate Feraldens, and there are gangs everywhere. Why not just kill EVERYONE in Kirkwall/

While we're there, Isabella betrayed Hawke, so kill her. Aveline didn't budge and ignited the war with the Qunari, so she's dead too. Merrile? Blood mage.. Anders? Terrorist. Fenris? Crazed murderer. Death, death, death.

Hell, kill Verric too for his disturbing chest hair. The end should be Hawke sitting alone on the Viscount's throne amidst a sea of blood and corpses. Why not?

[88mphSlayer]

Deified Data wrote...

Fact: You have to destroy both figureheads, anyway.

Why does the game force you to side with one over the other, then, if it makes no difference? The Templars try to arrest you whether you side with them or not. Orsino becomes an abomination whether you side with him or not. If everyone's against you, why can't you just decide to wage war against both groups if neither one trusts or respects you?

Siding with the Templars and becoming Viscount is the closest I've come to a sane, acceptable ending. If order must be restored to kirkwall, let it be me doing it, not the Templars or the Blood Mages (because there are no "regular mages").

yeah this makes no sense... if you're going to force somebody to pick a side, make sure in the end the outcome is actually different

i think a 3rd choice would be ideal as well but the problem is there's only 2 sides... what would a 3rd choice really be than an "easy button" for people who don't want a hard choice to make? it would have to be a side that also equally morally ambiguous imo, the reason it works for the witcher is that game always had 3 sides to the conflict

maybe have the 3rd option be "run away like a coward"

Modifié par 88mphSlayer, 02 avril 2011 - 02:46 .