53 réponses à ce sujet

[wowpwnslol]

Between Templars and Mages?

My character was totally badass by the end of the game. If I had a choice, I'd slaughter both Templars AND Mages. Being forced to side with pansy mages or cowardly templar led by a psycho is not something I want to do. It would be cool to be able to take out the trash, that way maybe the war between chantry and mages would not have happened. Bioware did a bad job when they forced you to pick a side.

[Mark B]

I agree.
http://social.biowar...4/index/6608485

[TJPags]

Maker requires it.

The Order dictates.

The game doesn't end otherwise.

Take your pick.

[Camenae]

TJPags wrote...

Maker requires it.

The Order dictates.

The game doesn't end otherwise.

Take your pick.

I pick "The Order dictates."

[Curlain]

TJPags wrote...

Maker requires it.

The Order dictates.

The game doesn't end otherwise.

Take your pick.

This is where I miss the Awesome button, it would have fixed this situation 

[Halo Quea]

wowpwnslol wrote...

Between Templars and Mages?

My character was totally badass by the end of the game. If I had a choice, I'd slaughter both Templars AND Mages. Being forced to side with pansy mages or cowardly templar led by a psycho is not something I want to do. It would be cool to be able to take out the trash, that way maybe the war between chantry and mages would not have happened. Bioware did a bad job when they forced you to pick a side.

Totally badass?  Like it honestly makes a difference?   My Hawke was a saint and constantly looking for the peaceful solution and he STILL was soaked in blood and covered in grey matter as he stood on top of a moutain of corpses at the end of the game. 

It honestly makes no difference.  As I said in another thread, Hawke doesn't solve problems, he KILLS them. 

[Plaintiff]

You might as well ask "Why do I have to kill the Archdemon in Origins? I want it to live and for the whole of Thedas to become a black and blistered Blightland where no life can grow." You can't do that, because the story requires you to kill it. Story requirements > unrealistic player expectations.

In case you hadn't noticed, the war between the Mages and the Chantry is already happening from the moment the game opens. If the situation could be avoided, Cassandra and Varric wouldn't be talking, and there would be no story. The writers obviously have a bigger plan for the world of Thedas. For the sake of continuing the bigger story, heck, for the sake of practicality in general, some of your choices are going to be restricted. You just have to deal.

[Grissium]

Its because you became Mr Big Important guy

[OldMan91]

Because sometimes sitting on the fence makes things worse. Just ask Grand Cleric Elthina.

Oh, right...

Modifié par OldMan91, 06 avril 2011 - 01:32 .

[sth128]

This ain't GTA; "kill everything that moves" isn't an option.

[TJPags]

sth128 wrote...

This ain't GTA; "kill everything that moves" isn't an option.

Maybe not an option . . .seems to be almost mandatory . .

[Emperor Iaius I]

Well, simple.

You can either be a good person, or you can side with the Templars. I mean, the Templars would just take out anybody who wasn't one of those ridiculous Andrastians.

[TheBlackBaron]

The Order Dictates.

One of the major complaints about the game is the lack of an option to, say, side with the city proper (most likely meaning you team up with the city guard - ohai Aveline) and try and protect the civilians from both Templars and Mages, or just the classic "screw you guys, I'm going home".

[Emperor Iaius I]

Yeah, fair point. A city option (like in New Vegas) would have been pretty nice.

[TheBlackBaron]

Emperor Iaius I wrote...

Yeah, fair point. A city option (like in New Vegas) would have been pretty nice.

Heck, New Vegas even gave two seperate options for siding with the city instead of the two main warring factions, either the Mr. House route or the Wild Card total independence route. 

[arcsquad12]

I agree with the city option. Aveline supports the Templars, but her reasoning is to protect the city more than their interests. Because we have to kill them both anyways, having the middle road of being a selfless individual would be appealing.

And it would still fit in with Cassandra blaming Hawke for the trouble, because he didn't choose a side and let both factions duke it out.

[scpulley]

Plaintiff wrote...

You might as well ask "Why do I have to kill the Archdemon in Origins? I want it to live and for the whole of Thedas to become a black and blistered Blightland where no life can grow." You can't do that, because the story requires you to kill it. Story requirements > unrealistic player expectations.

In case you hadn't noticed, the war between the Mages and the Chantry is already happening from the moment the game opens. If the situation could be avoided, Cassandra and Varric wouldn't be talking, and there would be no story. The writers obviously have a bigger plan for the world of Thedas. For the sake of continuing the bigger story, heck, for the sake of practicality in general, some of your choices are going to be restricted. You just have to deal.

This would be called railroading and I can promise you there are a lot better storytelling devices that accomplish the same thing. For one, you do kill everyone regardless, but the worst part of this type of railroading is they don't even put enough effort to tie Hawke to that choice. Who he was didn't matter at all, he didn't have any need to care or choose, in fact I'd say he had plenty of reason to not be involved. Instead he's forced to be, that's terrible storytelling. If you are going to force something at least have it make sense.

[Annarl]

sth128 wrote...

This ain't GTA; "kill everything that moves" isn't an option.

But it would be nice.  I miss you Niko:happy:  

We have to because the great minds at Bioware have further story implications for our choice.  I think, or at least I hope.

Modifié par omearaee, 06 avril 2011 - 02:43 .

[Conduit0]

Why do you have to pick sides? Simple, Hawke isn't Switzerland, only they get that option and get away with it.

[Plaintiff]

scpulley wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

You might as well ask "Why do I have to kill the Archdemon in Origins? I want it to live and for the whole of Thedas to become a black and blistered Blightland where no life can grow." You can't do that, because the story requires you to kill it. Story requirements > unrealistic player expectations.

In case you hadn't noticed, the war between the Mages and the Chantry is already happening from the moment the game opens. If the situation could be avoided, Cassandra and Varric wouldn't be talking, and there would be no story. The writers obviously have a bigger plan for the world of Thedas. For the sake of continuing the bigger story, heck, for the sake of practicality in general, some of your choices are going to be restricted. You just have to deal.

This would be called railroading and I can promise you there are a lot better storytelling devices that accomplish the same thing. For one, you do kill everyone regardless, but the worst part of this type of railroading is they don't even put enough effort to tie Hawke to that choice. Who he was didn't matter at all, he didn't have any need to care or choose, in fact I'd say he had plenty of reason to not be involved. Instead he's forced to be, that's terrible storytelling. If you are going to force something at least have it make sense.

You could say the same of Origins. The Warden has no personal connection to the Blight. He's compelled to fight it because he's essentially forced into the Grey Warden order through lack of options. Funny that.

No matter how interactive and customisable and non-linear a story is, some things just have to happen. They can't make a story at all if everything is subjective, there would be far too many variables to work with.

As for "no need to care or choose". Well, frankly, I think coming from a family of illegal mages, and possibly being one himself, is motivation aplenty for Hawke to pick one side or the other. Not to mention that all through the first and second act, you've been making the decision through microcosm, in every mission that involved templars or mages. Everything in the game is preparing you for making the final decision. Side missions provide the information to help your Hawke develop an opinion, interactions with characters provide you with alternate viewpoints to debate or concede with, the overall story-arc tells us how he worked his way into a position where his decisions would matter.

And let's not forget that both sides alternately attack/turn to Hawke for aid due to his views and status, his brother/sister may or may not be directly involved in the conflict, and the fact Kirkwall is kind of his home, and that a war would **** up his way of life as he knows it?

Honestly, if you can get to the end of the game and feel like your character isn't invested in the conflict, then I kinda suspect you're missing the point of roleplaying. The game can't do all the work for you. It can't make you empathise with the situation. The point of providing you with any options in the first place is so you can get into your character's headspace and fill in the blanks yourself.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 06 avril 2011 - 02:58 .

[scpulley]

Plaintiff wrote...

scpulley wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

You might as well ask "Why do I have to kill the Archdemon in Origins? I want it to live and for the whole of Thedas to become a black and blistered Blightland where no life can grow." You can't do that, because the story requires you to kill it. Story requirements > unrealistic player expectations.

In case you hadn't noticed, the war between the Mages and the Chantry is already happening from the moment the game opens. If the situation could be avoided, Cassandra and Varric wouldn't be talking, and there would be no story. The writers obviously have a bigger plan for the world of Thedas. For the sake of continuing the bigger story, heck, for the sake of practicality in general, some of your choices are going to be restricted. You just have to deal.

This would be called railroading and I can promise you there are a lot better storytelling devices that accomplish the same thing. For one, you do kill everyone regardless, but the worst part of this type of railroading is they don't even put enough effort to tie Hawke to that choice. Who he was didn't matter at all, he didn't have any need to care or choose, in fact I'd say he had plenty of reason to not be involved. Instead he's forced to be, that's terrible storytelling. If you are going to force something at least have it make sense.

You could say the same of Origins. The Warden has no personal connection to the Blight. He's compelled to fight it because he's essentially forced into the Grey Warden order through lack of options. Funny that.

No matter how interactive and customisable and non-linear a story is, some things just have to happen. They can't make a story at all if everything is subjective, there would be far too many variables to work with.

As for "no need to care or choose". Well, frankly, I think coming from a family of illegal mages, and possibly being one himself, is motivation aplenty for Hawke to pick one side or the other. Not to mention that all through the first and second act, you've been making the decision through microcosm, in every mission that involved templars or mages. Everything in the game is preparing you for making the final decision. Side missions provide the information to help your Hawke develop an opinion, interactions with characters provide you with alternate viewpoints to debate or concede with, the overall story-arc tells us how he worked his way into a position where his decisions would matter.

And let's not forget that both sides alternately attack/turn to Hawke for aid due to his views and status, his brother/sister may or may not be directly involved in the conflict, and the fact Kirkwall is kind of his home, and that a war would **** up his way of life as he knows it?

Honestly, if you can get to the end of the game and feel like your character isn't invested in the conflict, then I kinda suspect you're missing the point of roleplaying. The game can't do all the work for you. It can't make you empathise with the situation. The point of providing you with any options in the first place is so you can get into your character's headspace and fill in the blanks yourself.

You do not have to make a game completely open or even give a lot of choices to tell a good story. When you read a book, you aren't going through and deciding anything, you are just reading through the vision of the author had for a story he or she thought would be great to tell. Now, you can either like the book or not, that's based on opinion of how the story is presented. My point for DA 2, is it was not presented well, it's not even so much about lack of choice as it was there was no presentation. I'm sorry, but I look at games in a way like a book. If I wanted to 'fill in the blanks' so to speak in terms of major plot points of a story, I'd play D&D or go play a White Wolf game where I'm making up the story.

Was DAO some grand open world with lots of choice? No, you are correct. But, you felt engaged to the story. In the end the game is a visial experience. If you don't go through even a cutscene of some kind or dialog that adds to the story, you just get a vague codex entry or just find yourself all the sudden being asked to decide something, but there hasn't been enough presentation to see how that situation developed and tied the main character to it, yes it's an empty story and game. Filling in the blanks yourself I'm sorry is completely the wrong way to explain DA 2's story. It's like saying it's good if you get a book, but random chapters are ripped out. How likely is it you'll enjoy the story overall if you don't have at least some idea it's all there? Now, if you like empty stories that leave major plot points that have no connection to your main protagonist, that's nice. But, no offense, that's not at all what I'd see as quality from a gaming company that typically has made it's money on quality stories.

[Rifneno]

OldMan91 wrote...

Because sometimes sitting on the fence makes things worse. Just ask Grand Cleric Elthina.

Oh, right...

Best response ever to the worst DA2 question ever.

[Asdara]

I'm going to make myself unpopular here, but to me it made sense to be forced into a choice. Life is like that sometimes. If you've ever been in a real lose-lose situation in life, sometimes there just isn't the option to "not choose" given. Some situations demand something be done, because doing nothing is so far the worst possible result that it cannot be considered.

Imagine we don't stand with the Templars or the Mages for a moment, in a somewhat (fantasy sure) realistic way. Really think about what that would mean, if you, the beacon of the city's survival just three years ago, a refugee who came from Ferelden with nothing in a city FULL to the brim with your countrymen - YOU'VE made good, enough for the King of your homeland to seek you out, personally. You - from quiet "place of little consequence" Lothering. (Morrigan says) And you want to... do nothing? Let the mages and the templars just slaughter each other all over the city streets, among civilians, unchecked, and destroy every ounce of credibility and nobility you've built for yourself in the process - in a city that has gangs ready to run your countrymen back out into the wilderness at the slightest provocation?

Am I painting this black enough?

And for everyone who just thinks they'd kill everyone and let the Maker sort them out... sure - you could, and now what have you become? A homicidal tyrant that will have a Divine March called on them faster than you can say Deep Roads Idol. Which, by the way, seems already in the planning stages after Liliana's visit.

There's no "win" scenario, because the situation has been pushed - by madness, by external factors, by Anders pyrotechnics, by the murder of a beloved religious figure, by years of tension and turmoil, and the childhood traumas of a man turned abomination and a woman whose sister slaughtered her own family as a demon - when that many things collide you can't just close your eyes and hope things resolve themselves, and you can't just wipe the slate clean and proclaim everything is well.

Just my thoughts on it, I think it was fitting.

[Alamar2078]

I do wish I had the B5 choice of "Now get the hell out of our galaxy, both of you!"

Another poster came up with a good middleroad. Instead of siding with one side or the other per-se what your goal may have been is to try to get as many nobles, innocents, etc. out of the city while the two warring factions rip the city apart. Granted you'd still be forced to deal with Meredith & Orosino for game consistency but the "other" choice would have been great.

Edit:  Part of the plot was that Anders was trying to get everyone to make a choice so he could be sure that the status-quo didn't go on.   I think the devs took this a step too far and didn't give you the option to "not play the game others manuevered you into".

Modifié par Alamar2078, 06 avril 2011 - 11:51 .

[Paeyne]

TheBlackBaron wrote...

The Order Dictates.

One of the major complaints about the game is the lack of an option to, say, side with the city proper (most likely meaning you team up with the city guard - ohai Aveline) and try and protect the civilians from both Templars and Mages, or just the classic "screw you guys, I'm going home".

This.

I would have happily forced them all into the bay and closed the gates.

Let lightsabre Meridith kill  'Stitches' Orsino.

I wouldn't mind watching... with popcorn.