126 réponses à ce sujet

[The Angry One]

Herr Uhl wrote...

Kerridan Kaiba wrote...

@Asdara - I kind of wish I had let Carver kick the bucket too. That way I could have saved Fenris. At least I know he cares about my character and is not bitter about me "Stealing his spotlight!"

Seems like a petty reason to want someone dead.

I want Varric dead for being alive.
There, can't get pettier than that. 

[CloudOfShadows]

As an RPG player, I'm quite capable to feel into Hawke - and truly enjoy the different emotions and options presented. I was able to care for different characters and managed to get to know interesting character tidbits every playthrough so far.

I guess I do disagree with the "you" in the title. If there had been an "I", I suppose that would be fine. Opinions do differ.

[The Angry One]

CloudOfShadows wrote...

I guess I do disagree with the "you" in the title. If there had been an "I", I suppose that would be fine. Opinions do differ.

Then it'd be "DA2 doesn't make I care about anything".
Bad grammar is bad.

[Kohaku]

Herr Uhl wrote...

Kerridan Kaiba wrote...

@Asdara - I kind of wish I had let Carver kick the bucket too. That way I could have saved Fenris. At least I know he cares about my character and is not bitter about me "Stealing his spotlight!"

Seems like a petty reason to want someone dead.

I won't be surprised if others did it as well. I don't see a point for any of Hawke's family to be in the story outside of being killed anyway. At least I have a reason.

[Asdara]

Well, to be fair, it's not a big scene when you rescue anyone - LI or sibling - from the "fringe mage-templar alliance beach party" happening. It's basically 1-3 lines from anyone and they all say, essentially: 'thanks, that sucked, glad you stopped by, going home now'

So, whoever it is... not really significant. Now, if they'd held the person hostage properly instead of being all "oh we're sorry, this person was with you?! Our mistake!" about it... that might have been a point at which the game could force a stance change on the mage/templar issue or allow Hawke to make a very abstract moral call. As it is... it just falls apart when you get there, killing happens, everyone goes home. Missed opportunity.

[Kohaku]

I agree. I actually forgot what Carver said when I got him out of the mess but it was one line and he sounded a little more appreciative than normal.

I honestly think I would have been more involved or cared about them if they didn't get taken from you no matter what you do. It's easier for me to care about the companions because they are there with you through three acts. For the siblings, you see them here and there across the chapters. I can't vouch for Bethany's involvement because she died in my first playthough in the Deep Roads but for Carver.... he was pissy no matter what.

[Herr Uhl]

Kerridan Kaiba wrote...

I agree. I actually forgot what Carver said when I got him out of the mess but it was one line and he sounded a little more appreciative than normal.

I honestly think I would have been more involved or cared about them if they didn't get taken from you no matter what you do. It's easier for me to care about the companions because they are there with you through three acts. For the siblings, you see them here and there across the chapters. I can't vouch for Bethany's involvement because she died in my first playthough in the Deep Roads but for Carver.... he was pissy no matter what.

Carver got less pissy with time though. At least as a Warden.

[Kohaku]

@Herr Uhl - Really now? I just might have to do that. I was planning another playthrough anyway but I was thinking of at least making one of them a Gray Warden so that I've covered all bases.

It's not like I don't like Carver. I'm glad that they gave us a character that had some real sibling issues. I kind of wish I had him for longer than I did. I would never try to make him see my way because he's more interesting when he was at odds. However, when you don't see him for so long and he's still angry with you eventhough he's making a name for himself. I just find it odd.

[stobie]

Didn't make *you* care about anything, maybe.   I certainly cared. I would have done pretty much anything to, say, save Fenris from slavers, to protect Merrill from her demons, to put very dark glasses on Anders's glowing eyes, to help out Aveline in her adorable courtship, and to keep Varrick happy.  I was crushed when Isabella *really* left so I went way back to a L5 save to endear myself to her.

Geez. Are these forums *always* such havens of negativity and cynicism?  Yes? I thought so.

[graavigala85]

stobie wrote...

Didn't make *you* care about anything, maybe.   I certainly cared. I would have done pretty much anything to, say, save Fenris from slavers, to protect Merrill from her demons, to put very dark glasses on Anders's glowing eyes, to help out Aveline in her adorable courtship, and to keep Varrick happy.  I was crushed when Isabella *really* left so I went way back to a L5 save to endear myself to her.

Geez. Are these forums *always* such havens of negativity and cynicism?  Yes? I thought so.

read my other posts too before you jump the hate train, or as you said "negativity and cynicism"

[Vormaerin]

Danjaru wrote...

Morrigans ritual affects the After Battle thingy as well. Wether you die, or one of the Warden dies changes your companions responses (if you live) and there's a whole other scene if you die. Makes a big differense in the aftermath.

It's not irrelevant who you can summon, they're the allies you've gathered, the whole point of you going to all those places to gather allies.

And I've also given an example of how you can affect even the battle of Denerim by helping against the Generals and helping the Alienage or not. If you don't you have to fight the generals alongside the Archdemon. That added to the fact that DA:O was about taking down the Archdemon, you had 1 goal, in DA2 you could choose which side to support and in the end you got the exact same result anyways.

In DA2 you get the exact same results no matter what you do and with a extremely poor epilogue you don't even know the fate of your companions.

You don't get the exact same result.   You have the same two boss fights. Storming the Circle with the Templars is not identical to defending the tower against the Templars.  And Morrigan's ritual changes the epilogue, not the game.  So does your choice of mage and templar.  Besides, in my play throughs, Loghain always does that dying bit, not me. 

And yes, those guys are irrelevant.   Whether you use stunty NPC meatshields or furry ones is pretty much irrelevant.   You have the same amount of allies either way.  They do basically the same thing.    Its no different than all your choices in DA2 determining which of your companions (and others, like Zevran) are around to help in the final fights without being in the party.

The 'whole point' of Origins was for your character to gather up ineffectual NPCs for the final fight.  The whole point of DA2 was to develop your relationship to various individuals and determine which of them stood with you in the final sequence.

*rolls eyes*  The slide show at the end of Origins was pretty or something, I guess.  But hardly much of a step above "they wandered off".  And even what little was said in them didn't necessarily prove to be true.

The most you can say about the difference in choices in the game is that saving the dwarves from their own idiocy sounds more impressive  than setting the first Dreamer Mage in generations on the path to his own power.    Most of the epilogue slides of DAO are things you get during game play in DA2.   The fate of Feynriel, the elf girl, Ella, and others who send you letters during play instead of slides after it.

[Danjaru]

Vormaerin wrote...

You don't get the exact same result.   You have the same two boss fights. Storming the Circle with the Templars is not identical to defending the tower against the Templars.  And Morrigan's ritual changes the epilogue, not the game.  So does your choice of mage and templar.  Besides, in my play throughs, Loghain always does that dying bit, not me. 

And yes, those guys are irrelevant.   Whether you use stunty NPC meatshields or furry ones is pretty much irrelevant.   You have the same amount of allies either way.  They do basically the same thing.    Its no different than all your choices in DA2 determining which of your companions (and others, like Zevran) are around to help in the final fights without being in the party.

The 'whole point' of Origins was for your character to gather up ineffectual NPCs for the final fight.  The whole point of DA2 was to develop your relationship to various individuals and determine which of them stood with you in the final sequence.

*rolls eyes*  The slide show at the end of Origins was pretty or something, I guess.  But hardly much of a step above "they wandered off".  And even what little was said in them didn't necessarily prove to be true.

The most you can say about the difference in choices in the game is that saving the dwarves from their own idiocy sounds more impressive  than setting the first Dreamer Mage in generations on the path to his own power.    Most of the epilogue slides of DAO are things you get during game play in DA2.   The fate of Feynriel, the elf girl, Ella, and others who send you letters during play instead of slides after it.

You do get the same result, same people die/survive, same bosses, same ending pretty much when that story indicates that choosing sides would matter. Origins Denerim fight was pretty clear cut, you have 1 objective, and you fulfill it, no illusions of "you might be able to chose a different faction".

Again, they're not irrelevant, having them there is a sign of which allies you have. Of course you could do the whole end battle without using any of them. But it's still an sign of the path you took to get there. A very good tool for immersion and it makes sense. That added to the whole "battle march" where we see our allies gather from different places to go toward Denerim. It's alot different than "choose to save Zevran... Oh look, he pops up barely noticable in end battle".

Now you're just oversimplifying to your advantage. The point of DA:O is to gather allies to defeat the archdemon. You actually think the Dwarves only sent 40 people?. The ones you get to use are a fraction of the main army and are the ones that aren't too busy fighting, as said by Riordan. Along the way DA:O introduces us to several situations which aren't black and white, and your actions determines alot of peoples lives and shapes alot of Ferelden. In DA2 you're just simply the hired help that can fight, but does none of the major stuff, which is welcome over every story being "save the world" but still bad due to your character being the only one without motivation to do what he does.

And yes, getting closure on a 50 hour + investment is rather important, wether it's cinematic or textual. otherwise It's like reading a book and just as things are getting interesting it stops and you don't know the fate of any of the characters. Like cutting off Return Of The King just as Frodo and Sam get to Mordor.

First of all, how can you insult the Epilogue and then praise letters?
And helping the Dwarves even though their ways are self destructive by doing extensive quests is better than "dicking around and wait for your companions to get the story going". And saving Feyndriel and Grace and whatnot is something we get in Origins as well, Dagna, Connor, Jowan, Genitivi and so forth. But they're shown as side-choices that don't matter all too much, not The Only Choices.

Modifié par Danjaru, 04 avril 2011 - 10:08 .

[Vormaerin]

The difference is that you are confusing fluff with substance. Your decisions don't affect the gameplay. They affect your "closure". I was fine with some of that closure being during the game. I wasn't dissing the epilogue and praising the letters. I said they are the same thing. You apparently think the scale of your decisions is important. If you aren't altering the nature of the universe, you are wasting your time? I have the opposite reaction. I roll my eyes when I have to hand pick the leader of every place in creation personally because there is not one competent person in the entire rest of the world. What? How stupid is that? I had Loghain do the sacrifice, because obviously the world would collapse under its own stupidity if I wasn't there to hold every last person's hand.

I felt far, far more betrayed by the utter pointlessness of the Denerim and Landsmeet session than anything in DA2. What a joke that was.

In DA2, Orsino and Meredith both needed to be disposed of and it had been pretty obvious for a while. It would have been lame in the extreme if you only got to choose which of the two evil scum "won". I think the mage choice ought to have handled Orsino a little differently, but not being able to whack him if I saved the Circle would have sucked.

[Halie Star]

I felt horrified when the mother was changed, I literally felt the sickening feeling of a daughter who felt helpless. I have started several playthroughs, haven't finished any of them, but I expierenced the deaths of both siblings, and mom. I really get into a story, finding every bit there is to hear. So yes I felt the connections. Carver I felt sorry for, always in the heros shadow. Sibling rivalry at it's finest. I was glad he became a Templar, he finally had a plan. Bethany I loved, she seemed so good and innocent. 
But most of all, I loved the Hero's home. It sure beat being stuck in a camp.   

[Suron]

nicethugbert wrote...

Speak for yourself. I did not have this problem at all.

Also, DA2's story is just like DA:O.

DA:O, kill Archdemon, can't be avoided. DA2 kill Meredith, can't be avoided.

DA:O, kill Loghain or recuit him to fight Archdemon. DA2 kill Anders or recruit him to fight Meredith.

DA:O, do Morrigan's ritual or don't. DA2, side with mages and Cullen lets you go when Meredith dies or side with templars and all the Templars bow to you when Meredith dies.

DA:O how you treat various NPCs determines if they side with you for the final battle. DA2, how you treat various companions determines if they side with you for the final battle.

see these are funny.

you're example here sums up the ENTIRETY of DA2's choices..whereas you've left out over half of DA:O's.

but I'm sure you don't see that.

try again

[Vormaerin]

Suron wrote...


see these are funny.

you're example here sums up the ENTIRETY of DA2's choices..whereas you've left out over half of DA:O's.

but I'm sure you don't see that.

try again

You are right. I don't see that.  I just see someone arguing in bad faith by making statements that go beyond opinion to outright falsehoods.

Just off the top of my head, two more decisions in DA2:   
1) Duel the Arishok, Fight all the Qunari together, or don't fight at all.
2) Fight Ser Varnell or side with Sister Patrice against the Qunari.

[AngryFrozenWater]

Vormaerin wrote...

Name *one* meaningful difference in the entire end sequence of Denerim fighting that results from anything you do in Origins.

Nothing you do in Origins changes anything of substance except the epilogue and which cartoon says the plot speech.

You'll get a few armies when you help certain people out. You don't have to, but you can. Sometimes you even can decide what kind of armies that will be: mages or templars, elves or werewolves. I've never seen anything to that extent in DA2.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 05 avril 2011 - 03:27 .

[Vormaerin]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Vormaerin wrote...

Name *one* meaningful difference in the entire end sequence of Denerim fighting that results from anything you do in Origins.

Nothing you do in Origins changes anything of substance except the epilogue and which cartoon says the plot speech.

You get a few armies when you help certain people out. You don't have to, but you can. Sometimes you even can decide what kind of armies that will be: mages or templars, elves or werewolves. I never seen anything to that extend in DA2.

Yeah, but that's barely a decision.  You CAN'T get to the end without getting those armies.  You can decide if they are furry or have pointy ears, but that's cosmetic.  It doesn't actually affect the game play.

I think fighting with the mages against the templars or with the templars against the mages is at least as significant a difference (moreso, imho) to the way the end plays.

Modifié par Vormaerin, 05 avril 2011 - 03:29 .

[Lithuasil]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Vormaerin wrote...

Name *one* meaningful difference in the entire end sequence of Denerim fighting that results from anything you do in Origins.

Nothing you do in Origins changes anything of substance except the epilogue and which cartoon says the plot speech.

You'll get a few armies when you help certain people out. You don't have to, but you can. Sometimes you even can decide what kind of armies that will be: mages or templars, elves or werewolves. I've never seen anything to that extent in DA2.

So picking what glorified quest reward to bring to the (always exactly the same) final battle, is teh awesum choice, but say, being able to side with religious fanatics and cover the anti qunari conspiracy up, changing the main quests for the rest of the act, is not? 

[AngryFrozenWater]

Vormaerin wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Vormaerin wrote...

Name *one* meaningful difference in the entire end sequence of Denerim fighting that results from anything you do in Origins.

Nothing you do in Origins changes anything of substance except the epilogue and which cartoon says the plot speech.

You get a few armies when you help certain people out. You don't have to, but you can. Sometimes you even can decide what kind of armies that will be: mages or templars, elves or werewolves. I never seen anything to that extend in DA2.

Yeah, but that's barely a decision.  You CAN'T get to the end without getting those armies.  You can decide if they are furry or have pointy ears, but that's cosmetic.  It doesn't actually affect the game play.

You don't have to fight the elves. You can decide how to solve the situation when you do. The quest splits at that point: Take the side of the werwolves or the side of the elves. The same goes for the mages. You can either side with the mages or the templars. Both of these examples have a clear choice. None of them are forced upon you. But you already knew that, right? You just want to defend DA2 no matter what.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 05 avril 2011 - 03:36 .

[Lithuasil]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...
You don't have to fight the elves. You can decide how to solve the situation when you do. The quest splits at that point: Take the side of the werwolves or the side of the elves. The same goes for the mages. You can either side with the mages or the templars. Both of these examples have a clear choice. None of them are forced upon you. But you already knew that, right? You just want to defend DA2 no matter what.

No. Both of these 'decisions' have you do the exact same levels, then pick a dialogue option, and maybe get a slightly different bossfight in the exact same place. That's a paper thin illusion of choice at best.

[Vormaerin]

I am not arguing that there are no choices in DAO. I am arguing that claims that DA2 has no choices comparable to DAO is false. Both games are railroads with largely cosmetic decisions. Both have some zones where you can change things, both have zones where you can't.

But the choice of Mages or Templars in the end makes more of a difference than anything you can decide from the point you start to Denerim for the Landsmeet until the end.

[AngryFrozenWater]

Lithuasil wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...
You don't have to fight the elves. You can decide how to solve the situation when you do. The quest splits at that point: Take the side of the werwolves or the side of the elves. The same goes for the mages. You can either side with the mages or the templars. Both of these examples have a clear choice. None of them are forced upon you. But you already knew that, right? You just want to defend DA2 no matter what.

No. Both of these 'decisions' have you do the exact same levels, then pick a dialogue option, and maybe get a slightly different bossfight in the exact same place. That's a paper thin illusion of choice at best.

It is one of the few quest lines in which the impact has more than a simple dialog change effect. I love to see more of those. The team provided different endings for those quests, other dialogs, etc. You also lose a bit when siding with the werewolves. You cannot trade with the elves anymore and you cannot get extra experience points in the camp by providing their emissary with stuff. IIRC he doesn't accept stuff. On the other hand you do have the opportunity to kill all the dalish. You'll also have additional random encounters from that point on in which the dalish are not happy to see you. That is more than cosmetic impact. I agree that it does not change the main story line (I'll be the first to point that out), but don't tell me that all decisions in DA:O are cosmetic. It changed the game world.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 05 avril 2011 - 03:59 .

[Vormaerin]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

I agree that it does not change the main story line (I'll be the first to point that out), but don't tell me that all decisions in DA:O are cosmetic.

No one is.  They are saying 'They are no more or less cosmetic than the DA2 quests'.   The Feynriel quest has a variety of solutions that change subsequent quests.    The Sister Patrice quests have multiple solutions that change subsequent quests.  Etc.

I am just saying that you can't say that DA2 is cosmetic and then claim that DA:O isn't.  Because its the exact same kind of options. 

The ONLY differences are that in DA:O some of the decisions are more obviously important to the world beyond the game itself.    Deciding which guy is king of the dorfs has no game effect, but it has an obvious game world effect.  Deciding whether to kill or free Feynriel has minor game effects, but unknown game world effects.

[Lithuasil]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...
It is one of the few quest lines in which the impact has more than a simple dialog change effect. I love to see more of those. The team provided different endings for those quests, other dialogs, etc. You also lose a bit when siding with the werewolves. You cannot trade with the elves anymore and you cannot get extra experience points in the camp by providing their emissary with stuff. IIRC he doesn't accept stuff. On the other hand you do have the opportunity to kill all the dalish. You'll also have additional random encounters from that point on in which the dalish are not happy to see you. That is more than cosmetic impact. I agree that it does not change the main story line (I'll be the first to point that out), but don't tell me that all decisions in DA:O are cosmetic.

I'm not saying they were all cosmetic. But neither are the choices in DA2. Both games are essentially railroads, with a few gimmicks thrown in to maintain the illusion. There's exactly two differences. Origins had dialogue slides (whoop de doo), and DA2 had me actually caring for what was going on, and gave me the feeling of being responsible.