264 réponses à ce sujet

[Merced652]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

wojciec wrote...

which resulted in the same exact thing - circles rose up to fight the templars, wow what a great choice. It really illustrates how people can be given 2 options that ultimately lead to the same thing ang be so happy about it:)

Because every other game had so much more choice?

Baldur's Gate, I could kill Sarevok... or kill Sarevok.

Baldur's Gate II, I could kill Jonaleth... or kill Jonaleth.

Throne of Bhaal, I could kill Melissan... or kill Melissan and become a god (which, I should point out, had no consequences at all)

Knights of the Old Republic... I don't even remember what I could do, because it was so lame.

Knights of the Old Republic 2, I could kill Darth Treya and sail into Wild Space... or kill Darth Treya and sail into Wild Space.

Dragon Age: Origins, I could slay the Archdemon... or have someone else do it for me!

ROFL.

You know, i'd almost give you credit for steering the discussion to such, but i'm pretty sure someone even mildly intelligent will see that you offered siding with the mages as important and nothing else. We judged you on that alone, and then you want to bring in previous games that may or may not have had meaningful decisions in them prior to the set-piece ending. Pathetic is actually what your argument is. 

For the sake of memory i'll point out that in origins who you sided with on each treaty ultimately effected which troops you had at the end, you know.. when you did that set-piece ending. You also didn't make mention of the DR and whether your warden died as a result of slaying the archdemon of if you sacrificed alistair or loghain. Oh.. and whether you let loghain live blah mother****ing blah blah. Nothing in DA2 compares. 

But please continue. 

[mesmerizedish]

UltiPup wrote...

Perhaps we need to define what we think qualifies as a RPG. Obviously, we are not all in agreement.

If this turns into a "what is an RPG" thread, I am so out of here <_<

I'm a little ashamed that I was so easily distracted by "no choices" after everyone's "there's no character creation" idea fell so thoroughly flat.

[Alyka]

UltiPup wrote...

But, if you REALLY want the true blue RPG? Its in your head. Play with yourself for a bit and see how fun it is.

...in the bedroom.That's where the real RPG is.

[Merced652]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

UltiPup wrote...

Perhaps we need to define what we think qualifies as a RPG. Obviously, we are not all in agreement.

If this turns into a "what is an RPG" thread, I am so out of here <_<

I'm a little ashamed that I was so easily distracted by "no choices" after everyone's "there's no character creation" idea fell so thoroughly flat.

here it comes :innocent:


"i feel no obligation to continue this discussion yadi yah yah"

Modifié par Merced652, 09 avril 2011 - 07:55 .

[mesmerizedish]

Merced652 wrote...

ROFL.

You know, i'd almost give you credit for steering the discussion to such, but i'm pretty sure someone even mildly intelligent will see that you offered siding with the mages as important and nothing else. We judged you on that alone, and then you want to bring in previous games that may or may not have had meaningful decisions in them prior to the set-piece ending. Pathetic is actually what your argument is. 

For the sake of memory i'll point out that in origins who you sided with on each treaty ultimately effected which troops you had at the end, you know.. when you did that set-piece ending. You also didn't make mention of the DR and whether your warden died as a result of slaying the archdemon of if you sacrificed alistair or loghain. Oh.. and whether you let loghain live blah mother****ing blah blah. Nothing in DA2 compares. 

But please continue.

So, you ignore every game but Origins, and this is different from what you're accusing me of... how?

And you're wrong. None of those choices are significant. Who I side with and how I've treated my companions dictates who fights with me at the end of DAII. The only difference between that and who fights with in Denerim is that I never actually used any of the armies in Denerim.

[Baelyn]

Alyka wrote...

UltiPup wrote...

But, if you REALLY want the true blue RPG? Its in your head. Play with yourself for a bit and see how fun it is.

...in the bedroom.That's where the real RPG is.

Ok seriously. Can we all at least agree on this one?

[mesmerizedish]

Baelyn wrote...

Alyka wrote...

UltiPup wrote...

But, if you REALLY want the true blue RPG? Its in your head. Play with yourself for a bit and see how fun it is.

...in the bedroom.That's where the real RPG is.

Ok seriously. Can we all at least agree on this one?

I like to be the naughty mage and MorningBird likes to be the templar interrogator.

It usually ends with mind control blood magic

[Merced652]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Merced652 wrote...

ROFL.

You know, i'd almost give you credit for steering the discussion to such, but i'm pretty sure someone even mildly intelligent will see that you offered siding with the mages as important and nothing else. We judged you on that alone, and then you want to bring in previous games that may or may not have had meaningful decisions in them prior to the set-piece ending. Pathetic is actually what your argument is. 

For the sake of memory i'll point out that in origins who you sided with on each treaty ultimately effected which troops you had at the end, you know.. when you did that set-piece ending. You also didn't make mention of the DR and whether your warden died as a result of slaying the archdemon of if you sacrificed alistair or loghain. Oh.. and whether you let loghain live blah mother****ing blah blah. Nothing in DA2 compares. 

But please continue.

So, you ignore every game but Origins, and this is different from what you're accusing me of... how?

And you're wrong. None of those choices are significant. Who I side with and how I've treated my companions dictates who fights with me at the end of DAII. The only difference between that and who fights with in Denerim is that I never actually used any of the armies in Denerim.

I don't use them either, they were there however. But you're seemingly forgeting to take on the issue of the DR, loghain, and who you placed on the throne and all of that. If you want to tell me none of that matters then i'm fine with that, just don't then tell me siding with the god damn mages did. 

[xkg]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

UltiPup wrote...

Perhaps we need to define what we think qualifies as a RPG. Obviously, we are not all in agreement.

If this turns into a "what is an RPG" thread, I am so out of here <_<

I'm a little ashamed that I was so easily distracted by "no choices" after everyone's "there's no character creation" idea fell so thoroughly flat.

lol what are you talking about, it was other way around - your "there is character creation" idea failed
giving name to character isnt character creation

[mesmerizedish]

Merced652 wrote...

I don't use them either, they were there however. But you're seemingly forgeting to take on the issue of the DR, loghain, and who you placed on the throne and all of that. If you want to tell me none of that matters then i'm fine with that, just don't then tell me siding with the god damn mages did.

I never said that siding with the mages had consequences. It absolutely does matter, because it helps define my character. The outcome, then, is irrelevant. Making the choice is all that's important.

[Merced652]

xkg wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

UltiPup wrote...

Perhaps we need to define what we think qualifies as a RPG. Obviously, we are not all in agreement.

If this turns into a "what is an RPG" thread, I am so out of here <_<

I'm a little ashamed that I was so easily distracted by "no choices" after everyone's "there's no character creation" idea fell so thoroughly flat.

lol what are you talking about, it was other way around - your "there is character creation" idea failed
giving name to character isnt character creation

A name i saw like once or twice in the entire game from what i recall. I could've swore i saw it in dialogue but obviously unspoken. It didn't help that bioware stole the name i used for my characters for well over 10 years now and on a stupid templar(and then misspronounce it to boot).  

[xkg]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Merced652 wrote...

I don't use them either, they were there however. But you're seemingly forgeting to take on the issue of the DR, loghain, and who you placed on the throne and all of that. If you want to tell me none of that matters then i'm fine with that, just don't then tell me siding with the god damn mages did.

I never said that siding with the mages had consequences. It absolutely does matter, because it helps define my character. The outcome, then, is irrelevant. Making the choice is all that's important.

if thats what you want then in DAO single bigger quest you can make more choices defining your character than in whole DA2 i can list them to prove it tou you can you do the same from the other side of 'fence' ?

Modifié par xkg, 09 avril 2011 - 08:06 .

[Merced652]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Merced652 wrote...

I don't use them either, they were there however. But you're seemingly forgeting to take on the issue of the DR, loghain, and who you placed on the throne and all of that. If you want to tell me none of that matters then i'm fine with that, just don't then tell me siding with the god damn mages did.

I never said that siding with the mages had consequences. It absolutely does matter, because it helps define my character. The outcome, then, is irrelevant. Making the choice is all that's important.

I pretty much assumed this is exactly where you'd take that, bravo. The problem of course being that all of the aforemention games in your diatribe offered just as many choices for you to use in some close personal interpretation of who your character is. I don't see why, in any event, you're going to champion this game when all of the others in the past did the same thing and arguably better! Nevermind that in some of those games the choices mattered to the world. But i digress. 

[wojciec]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Merced652 wrote...

I don't use them either, they were there however. But you're seemingly forgeting to take on the issue of the DR, loghain, and who you placed on the throne and all of that. If you want to tell me none of that matters then i'm fine with that, just don't then tell me siding with the god damn mages did.

I never said that siding with the mages had consequences. It absolutely does matter, because it helps define my character. The outcome, then, is irrelevant. Making the choice is all that's important.

You can kill mages bu the hundreds and at the end still side with them. You can help the mages assassinate and incriminate templars, save apostares that eventually turn into blood mages and demons and then still side with the templars and they will gladly have you back. Hey I don't like mages, gonna kill the lot of them, oh a they want me to defend them in the end? suure why not.

Go go gadget character definition.

[mesmerizedish]

Merced652 wrote...

I pretty much assumed this is exactly where you'd take that, bravo. The problem of course being that all of the aforemention games in your diatribe offered just as many choices for you to use in some close personal interpretation of who your character is.

That's true. I don't think DAII is any better.

I don't see why, in any event, you're going to champion this game when all of the others in the past did the same thing and arguably better!

Because I liked this game.

Nevermind that in some of those games the choices mattered to the world.

Which ones?

wojciec wrote...

You can kill mages bu the hundreds and at the end still side with them. You can help the mages assassinate and incriminate templars, save apostares that eventually turn into blood mages and demons and then still side with the templars and they will gladly have you back. Hey I don't like mages, gonna kill the lot of them, oh a they want me to defend them in the end? suure why not.

Go go gadget character definition.

You're criticizing the game for allowing you to play chaotic neutral?

Modifié par ishmaeltheforsaken, 09 avril 2011 - 08:10 .

[xkg]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

You're criticizing the game for allowing you to play chaotic neutral?

nope man 
lawful character is all about doing things according to laws be it evil or good and chaotic doing against those laws

so chaotic character couldnt side with templar no matter what

Modifié par xkg, 09 avril 2011 - 08:14 .

[wojciec]

[quote]wojciec wrote...

You can kill mages bu the hundreds and at the end still side with them. You can help the mages assassinate and incriminate templars, save apostares that eventually turn into blood mages and demons and then still side with the templars and they will gladly have you back. Hey I don't like mages, gonna kill the lot of them, oh a they want me to defend them in the end? suure why not.

Go go gadget character definition.[/quote]

You're criticizing the game for allowing you to play chaotic neutral?

[/quote]

The game does not acknowledge character alignment in that respect. This makes choices like that stupid ant leaves you scratching your melon saying "wtf".

[mesmerizedish]

wojciec wrote...

The game does not acknowledge character alignment in that respect. This makes choices like that stupid ant leaves you scratching your melon saying "wtf".

That's what chaotic neutral is. If you're not saying "wtf," you're doing it wrong.

Modifié par ishmaeltheforsaken, 09 avril 2011 - 08:15 .

[xkg]

do you realy think that - chaotic - aligment is one which is changing sides more often than isabela jumping from one bed to another ??
"You doing it wrong" - only comes to my mind right now - go read about aligments and then comeback

[wojciec]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

wojciec wrote...

The game does not acknowledge character alignment in that respect. This makes choices like that stupid ant leaves you scratching your melon saying "wtf".

That's what chaotic neutral is. If you're not saying "wtf," you're doing it wrong.

And that really explains why groups, both of which you can cut down to 50% of it's original number throughout of your adventures suddenly forget all about it and gladly accept you as their protector going as far as to even ask for your aid. Playing like that (doing the sidequests involving assassinating and otherwise eliminating a great number of both factions members) would more likely earn you the itle of Templar Slayer or Magebane. I'd more likely accept the outcome of both of them turning on me on the spot.

Modifié par wojciec, 09 avril 2011 - 08:26 .

[mesmerizedish]

wojciec wrote...

And that really explains why groups, both of which you can cut down to 50% of it's original number throughout of your adventures suddenly forget all about it and gladly accept you as their protector going as far as to even ask for your aid. Playing like that (doing the sidequests involving assassinating ang otherwise liminating a great number of both factions) would more likely earn you the itle of Templar Slayer or Magebane. I'd more likely accept the outcome of both of them turning on me on the spot.

I agree.

[Sacred_Fantasy]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...
Every one of those games had a single origin story (like DAII), class selection (like DAII), name creation (like DAII), and appearance customization (like DAII).

What's your point?

What background are you talking about?
I played NW, NW 2 and Origins.
NW = Every single character you played started at academy. They have no predefined background. You defined their background according to your race. If you played as human you can't  be the same origin as if you played as half-orc.

As a player, you can shape whatever history or education you want into your character but choosing a race tends to bring certain permanent attributes to your character. If you play a Halfling for example you will be of shorter stature to most of the races in NWN. You can be an unusually large Halfling but you still will be seen as a Halfling by the rest of the world. Also consider some races have an irrational dislike of other races. Dwarves are known for there mistrust of elves for example. You could be the most true-hearted Paladin in the known world but the Dwarven bartender won't let you stay because you're an elf. These are things to consider when picking a race.The particulars of the culture of each race will not be dealt with as each can be subject to interpretation by the player when creating a character. The bonuses and penalties are described as they effect your character in the game.

http://nwn.bioware.com/players/races.html

NW 2 = There's a thing called backgrounds trait which you get to decide at character creation. Again you shape your own background story. 

Character Backgrounds are character traits that are chosen at character creation. These traits give bonuses to one aspect of the player's character while penalizing another. These are not the same as Background Traits, which are chosen as a possible feat at level one (in lieu of some other feat).In the official campaign characters in the player's home village will react to the character backgrounds - sometimes favorably, sometimes not. In particular the Troublemaker feat causes the player to miss out on a number of low level free items near the beginning of the game.

http://nwn2.wikia.com/wiki/Character_backgrounds

Please don't compare RPG games with interactive story like DA 2.

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 09 avril 2011 - 08:27 .

[xkg]

btw if u are too lazy to search for it ill just copy paste it here - DD chaotic Neutral
Alignment:
Chaotic Neutral characters are unstable, and frequently insane. They believe in disorder first and foremost, and will thus strive for that disorder in everything they do. This means that they will do whatever seems 'fun' or 'novel' at any given time.

[wojciec]

xkg wrote...

btw if u are too lazy to search for it ill just copy paste it here - DD chaotic Neutral
Alignment:
Chaotic Neutral characters are unstable, and frequently insane. They believe in disorder first and foremost, and will thus strive for that disorder in everything they do. This means that they will do whatever seems 'fun' or 'novel' at any given time.

Praise the unstable, and frequently insane "champion" of Kirkwall.

[Sacred_Fantasy]

Aermas wrote...
No matter what you are still Hawke,

No I'm not. I am Cassandra and my task is to find out about Hawke.

If I'm Hawke then how come I don't know about my own past? How come I don't even know if I'm dead or alive. You are not making sense of yourself if you role-played Hawke.