127 réponses à ce sujet

[Taleroth]

Or What Do You Mean Its Not Symbolic?

I'm having a hard time coming up with consistent themes or overriding morals to the story.  On one hand, we have promotional material referring to the game as "dark heroic fantasy."  There are various references within the game that state the Grey Wardens do anything it takes to stop the Blight.  Duncan kills Jory, a man attempting a retreat.  All of these together tend to agree in a vague sense.  They're relatively dark, they imply hard decisions of killing one to save many or similar, sacrifices.

But does that show up in the rest of the game?

Do we need to sacrifice anyone to save Redcliffe?  Not really, we can potentially save everyone, though it's hard.  There's definitely no overt sacrifice, just people dying in battle.  I still can't save that stupid Mayor.  That's hardly dark.  There's no hard decisions, you don't have to kill anyone to save anyone else, no sacrifices to be made.  Heck, the only person you're even allowed to kill, the Smith, leads to a less than ideal setup for the battle.

Moral of Redcliffe?  It seems to be a simple one of being helpful saves the day.

How about Redcliffe Castle?  We must have to sacrifice in order to save Conner?  You don't HAVE to, but you can.  You can kill the possessed child to save Redcliffe, kill the mother to save the child and Redcliffe, or kill absolutely nobody and save everyone.  It hardly seems a moral dilemma when your options are to kill one of two people or kill nobody and get the almost the exact same outcome.  Pretty much the only ultimate difference between the three options I can find is whether or not Alistair gets angry at you.

Moral of Redcliffe Castle?  Killing people is okay for a good cause but totally unnecessary, you lazy git.  That's kind of dark, I guess.

Moral of Mage's Tower?  A popular early visit.  This one has to be dark.  The Mages basically live in a state of necessary incarceration to protect the world.  They, early on, must be forced to a challenge that could lead to their death.  And if its believed they won't pass it, they may just get lobotomized early to save their life.  Whoah, that's like SUPER-DARK.  Heck, when you arrive people are suggesting that you just kill them all to save the world, even the innocents, just to be safe.  And that is ultimately a choice presented to you.  Maybe it's time for that hard decision!  Kill everyone to save the world or let them live and potentially doom it.  Does the necessity of this decision play itself out in the consequences to choice we make?  Does saving the Mages doom the world to abomination terror?  No.  Saving lives ends as it often does in these things, with a happy ending.

Moral of the Mage Tower?  At times in life, you will be confronted with hard decisions.  Such as whether or not you want to have guys with swords or Mages join your army.  Deep.

Holy crap this is getting long.

Welcome to Brecilian Forest.  Where the Elves are tormented by Werewolves.  However, things are not always as they seem.  You see, the Elvish leader created the Werewolves as an act of vengeance.  And the Werewolves attacked the Elves seeking some of their own vengeance.  An ages long hatred between peoples with no end in sight.  You, however, must end it now by any means necessary.  DUM DUM DUUUUUUM!  The obvious solution is to kill these tormented Werewolves to save the Elves.  And to enhance the tragedy, you are constantly confronted by a fairly peaceful, if incredibly wary, Werewolf.  So, this choice could indeed be hard.  Two peoples, who themselves desire peace and an end to their conflict and pains.  But, hey, why choose?  Why not save them both?  It's easy!  Either way you fight a boss fight of similar difficulty.  And the only casualties end up being two people who have already lived way too long, they choose this fate and meet it gladly.  But ultimately more people are saved.

Moral of Brecillian Forest?  Vengeance creates a terrible cycle, but peace can eventually be found when people talk with each other.  Unless you're really persuasive and think Wolfmen are awesome.  Hint: They are.

Orzammar, home of the Dwarves.  I think I'll end my post with them.  Fitting, since I view them as being the most interesting decisions faced in the game.  It's a feud between successors to the throne.  A son of the King and the man the King chose to succede him.  One's a terrible man who murdered and framed family for power, the other is a double dealing liar.  And to gain either one's favor, you must find a cherished citizen, a Paragon.  Your quest leads you to the revelation that this Paragon is ****g nuts.  It also leads you to the truth of Golems and a difficult choice.  Gain the Golems to your forces, but enslave a people.  Or end this slavery and do without them.  Wait a sec.  That's a dilemma!  Either way you still get your Paragon and the Dwarves, but you can also get Golems, if you choose the less ideal path.  And at the end, you can choose the King.  Double dealing, but seemingly nice Harrowmont.  Or murdering and framing tyrant Bhelen.  At the end you find the consequence of this, nice Harrowmont is a terrible king, tyrant Bhelen is terrific.

Moral of the Dwarves?  Sometimes the less ideal choice leads to a better outcome for you and extra help you need.  Also, politicians suck.


I said I'd end this with the Dwarves, but like Harrowmont, I'm a liar.  I'm going to end this with Morrigan.  A cold hearted witch.  A person who, through friendship or love, you can melt the ice that flows through her veins to show her the little girl that still hides inside.  Only to get kicked right in the cherrypicker by being abandoned at the end regardless.

What is the moral of Morrigan?  *bleep* you, that's what.

There's more to discuss, but I hope my question is clear.  What connects these?  Redcliffe, Mage's Tower, and Brecillian Forest all can end with ideal solutions without any additional effort, no negative consequences at all to the shiny happy path.  But the Dwarves can end with you choosing a less "ideal" solution on the Golems for greater reward.  And choosing the greater evil choice for King that leads to a better outcome for Dwarves.  Then there's Morrigan, where you get kicked in the junk whether you invest or not.

What are we supposed to take away at the end of it all?

[kaiki01]

One theme I take from the game is that it's hard work to make everyone happy. Often you must make hard choices and not everything works out in the end. But even with all the flaws and problems it is still worth while to try and make the world a better place, because you can make difference. It seems existentialist.

[RunCDFirst]

The theme I take away from the game is that it's impossible to please the fanbase.



I'm with you, I would have liked harder, dark choices. But there's lots of posters already fuming over the choices currently present and how not everything can be flowers, puppies and hugs at the end.



C'est la vie, I suppose.

[Tielis]

Thank you for this post. I just finished my first playthrough with a "chaotic good" character, and I agree with all of what you said.



Because of this post, I'm considering now playing through with a spoiled brat and taking all the different choices.

[Spaghetti_Ninja]

What are we supposed to take away at the end of it all?

What do you want, to be taught lessons about morality by a video game? Go read the Bible, or the I Ching, or better yet, watch Sesame street.

[Reiella]

On Harrowmont, I don't think he was actually double dealing, that was just Bhelen trying to frame him.  Harrowmont's downside is being stuck in the old ways and continuing the classist regime that's doing little but to continue to isolate Orzammar.

[justin msc]

I don't understand why you're so unhappy with all the happy-ending choices that are allowed in every one of your scenarios, only to also be unhappy about the only no-happy-ending-possible scenario with Morrigan. I would think that if you really wanted a dark fantasy, you would use the Morrigan story as an example of the only time there was no way to achieve a happy ending. Basically it sounds like any scenario would displease you, but correct me if I'm wrong?

[RunCDFirst]

Reiella wrote...

On Harrowmont, I don't think he was actually double dealing, that was just Bhelen trying to frame him.  Harrowmont's downside is being stuck in the old ways and continuing the classist regime that's doing little but to continue to isolate Orzammar.

What's wrong with the caste system?

I think Sten said it best, 'Your peasants want to be merchants, your merchants want to be nobles and your nobles want to be soldiers. No one is satisfied with their place in life.'

[nvtsbamf]

if you really want a "dark fantasy" ending, check this out. next time you are in the deep roads, and your group is killed by darkspawn, don't reload.



oh the horror

[RunCDFirst]

nvtsbamf wrote...

if you really want a "dark fantasy" ending, check this out. next time you are in the deep roads, and your group is killed by darkspawn, don't reload.

oh the horror

I didn't die in the Deep Roads . Why BioWare?! This game needs to be Deeper and more Roadie!

[nvtsbamf]

clearly, you missed out on one of the best endings.

[Taleroth]

Reiella wrote...

On Harrowmont, I don't think he was actually double dealing, that was just Bhelen trying to frame him.  Harrowmont's downside is being stuck in the old ways and continuing the classist regime that's doing little but to continue to isolate Orzammar.

I suspected he was framed too, but couldn't see how it is possible.  We actually went to the people the deals were with.  We showed them papers, they got convinced of it on their own.  There had to be something convincing in that paper that left them so damned sure.

However, Bhelen does similar tricks several times, so it's very right to suspect him of foul play.

justin msc wrote...

I don't understand why you're so unhappy with all the happy-ending choices that are allowed in every one of your scenarios, only to also be unhappy about the only no-happy-ending-possible scenario with Morrigan. I would think that if you really wanted a dark fantasy, you would use the Morrigan story as an example of the only time there was no way to achieve a happy ending. Basically it sounds like any scenario would displease you, but correct me if I'm wrong?

You're wrong.  I'm not unhappy with any ending.  I LOVE happy endings, in fact.  I rather enjoy dark endings at times, too.  But I also like choices to have weight.  And I like consistency.  When a story presents you with so many ideal choices that lead to ideal outcomes, it's awkward and inconsistent to present the setting as one where less than ideal choices must be made for the better outcome.  It's a mixed message.  Especially since, sometimes even less than ideal choices lead to nearly ideal outcomes.  And, in Morrigan's case, all roads lead nowhere.

Are we to accept an idealistic message?  You can save everyone if you try and believe.  You can save the day, end the curse, rescue the boy and his mother, why can't you also get the girl?  You can, but only that girl, not this girl.

Are we to accept a cynical message?  Sometimes you're presented with hard choices, must choose the lesser evil, or maybe even choosing the ideal doesn't always work out.  All politicians are unpredictable and untrustworthy, sometimes a tyrant can be a great king, sometimes you can't get the girl, unless it's Lelianna, sometimes slavery can help save the day, sometimes even the most noble heart (Alistair) seeks vengeance and there's nothing you can do about it, except when they're elves?

Modifié par Taleroth, 18 novembre 2009 - 07:08 .

[Nhani]

Themes? Do I even need to mention the Hero's Journey? It's a pretty given obvious, no matter how malleable parts of it is - if you reject your Call to Adventure, the journey itself will still drag you along kicking and screaming. Many of the traditional parts are all there, no matter how dark or grim people might ascribe them to be. Either out of an obligation you didn't want, a desperate desire to survive or just the kindness of his/her heart, your character will follow the Hero's Journey.

That said, this isn't a fairytale - telling a moral isn't the point (and I'd like to think that part is pretty obvious). If it tries to tell anything though, I suppose it is about consequence - making a choice and living with it - seeing the repercussions after in epilogues. Each path taken is a narrative on its own - however driven we people are to min/max our own narrative experience and look for the ultimate solution.. doing that takes away from the narrative, weakens the choices made and removes the weight.

A choice is much different when made with the benefit of foresight.

I have a comparisson of sorts, actually, of a much different sort of game: Wing Commander, the very first one back from 1990. They actually made a branching narrative for it, where how well you made decided roughly what path you took through the game in terms of campaigns and missions, and so long your character remained alive and able to fly, you could technically continue no matter how badly you botched things up. (Though sooner or later you hit an end that was unwinnable if you did that badly). So what was the problem? Well.. people just kept loading when they failed to reach the 'best' possible outcome and very few ever saw (nor accepted) the alternate route but the very best. The second game, by comparisson, was completely linear.

If anything, I'd say if you're looking for the game to have a moral point, or to leave you with something, I'd say that something actually evaporates when we know what's coming. The point is our choices, what do we choose - or perhaps rather what does our characters choose.

[Curry Noodles]

RunCDFirst wrote...

What's wrong with the caste system?

I think Sten said it best, 'Your peasants want to be merchants, your merchants want to be nobles and your nobles want to be soldiers. No one is satisfied with their place in life.'

I think the problem with the caste system is that you have a large portion of the population outside of it, where they aren't even treated as sentient beings.  There's a document somewhere in orzammar that indicates the reason the casteless are still casteless is to ensure a steady supply of suicide soldiers into the legion of the dead. 

[RunCDFirst]

Curry Noodles wrote...
I think the problem with the caste system is that you have a large portion of the population outside of it, where they aren't even treated as sentient beings.  There's a document somewhere in orzammar that indicates the reason the casteless are still casteless is to ensure a steady supply of suicide soldiers into the legion of the dead. 

True, but they've also managed to hold the darkspawn off up to now so it seems to be working for them. 

As for themes and whatnot, BioWare always tells the Hero's Journey. They also always tell it really well. Just... sometimes you'd like some other themes. I don't really want this topic to get derailed, but I felt that KotOR II explored some other themes than just the typical Journey and told them well... considering the state of the game.

[Reiella]

Taleroth wrote...

I suspected he was framed too, but couldn't see how it is possible.  We actually went to the people the deals were with.  We showed them papers, they got convinced of it on their own.  There had to be something convincing in that paper that left them so damned sure.

However, Bhelen does similar tricks several times, so it's very right to suspect him of foul play.

Take the papers to the Shaperate, it'll reveal them.

[Taleroth]

Reiella wrote...

Taleroth wrote...

I suspected he was framed too, but couldn't see how it is possible.  We actually went to the people the deals were with.  We showed them papers, they got convinced of it on their own.  There had to be something convincing in that paper that left them so damned sure.

However, Bhelen does similar tricks several times, so it's very right to suspect him of foul play.

Take the papers to the Shaperate, it'll reveal them.

Blast you.  Two playthroughs, never considered it.

[David Gaider]

Interesting thoughts on the themes. If you're interested in another perspective, I believe there's a blog up at Gamasutra on this subject -- HERE.

[Nhani]

David Gaider wrote...
Interesting thoughts on the themes. If you're interested in another perspective, I believe there's a blog up at Gamasutra on this subject -- HERE.

Huh, that was actually a whole lot more interesting an analysis that I expected there to be. Thank you for sharing.

[Taleroth]

David Gaider wrote...

Interesting thoughts on the themes. If you're interested in another perspective, I believe there's a blog up at Gamasutra on this subject -- HERE.

Interesting.  I can seriously relate with him under his Walking the Line topic.  I think his description of the game as denying expectations and skirting internal consistency (which I would argue it didn't siply skirt) is a very succinct restatement of my position.  Where he found intellectual satisfaction and lacked emotional satisfaction, I lacked the intellectual, but found the emotional.

And his analysis of personalities being representative of themes is one I had not considered and is worth considering further.

Modifié par Taleroth, 18 novembre 2009 - 07:29 .

[Forumtroll]

Nhani wrote...

Themes? Do I even need to mention the Hero's Journey? It's a pretty given obvious, no matter how malleable parts of it is - if you reject your Call to Adventure, the journey itself will still drag you along kicking and screaming. Many of the traditional parts are all there, no matter how dark or grim people might ascribe them to be. Either out of an obligation you didn't want, a desperate desire to survive or just the kindness of his/her heart, your character will follow the Hero's Journey.

That said, this isn't a fairytale - telling a moral isn't the point (and I'd like to think that part is pretty obvious). If it tries to tell anything though, I suppose it is about consequence - making a choice and living with it - seeing the repercussions after in epilogues. Each path taken is a narrative on its own - however driven we people are to min/max our own narrative experience and look for the ultimate solution.. doing that takes away from the narrative, weakens the choices made and removes the weight.

A choice is much different when made with the benefit of foresight.

I have a comparisson of sorts, actually, of a much different sort of game: Wing Commander, the very first one back from 1990. They actually made a branching narrative for it, where how well you made decided roughly what path you took through the game in terms of campaigns and missions, and so long your character remained alive and able to fly, you could technically continue no matter how badly you botched things up. (Though sooner or later you hit an end that was unwinnable if you did that badly). So what was the problem? Well.. people just kept loading when they failed to reach the 'best' possible outcome and very few ever saw (nor accepted) the alternate route but the very best. The second game, by comparisson, was completely linear.

If anything, I'd say if you're looking for the game to have a moral point, or to leave you with something, I'd say that something actually evaporates when we know what's coming. The point is our choices, what do we choose - or perhaps rather what does our characters choose.

This is well written. I support your ideas. Choice makes you think even if it is about how to best play the situation to get the best possible reward.

[Reiella]

Taleroth wrote...

Blast you.  Two playthroughs, never considered it.

Heh, I found it by dumb luck when doing some other quest .

[The Angry One]

The moral of the story?



"Old maids tell boring tales."

[RunCDFirst]

He gave the 'Veteran' money more than one time! I was sad there wasn't a 'punch in face' option with that guy. The second time I saw him with the 'Orphan'... let's just say I can understand why so many people think ill of elves. That part was well done.

I don't know, I never really felt the 'Draw of the Shadow'. There are very few situations where giving into the Shadow is strategically or monetarily advantageous. And, perhaps due to my thrifty nature, I ended up with over 100 sovereigns by the end of the game and no idea how to spend them. My character probably just squirreled it away for a 30 year retirement.

The comment on ruthless power mongering is interesting, but it didn't seem like there was a lot of time spent cautioning against it. Obsession seems more prominent than power mongering. I mean, Loghain's sin isn't that he desires the throne. He doesn't really want the throne. He's just obsessed with keeping Orlais out of Ferelden. Likewise, Branka doesn't wish to use the Anvil of the Void to gain political power but military power against the darkspawn.

It is both character's obsession that brings about the conflict with the Shadow. Caridin could be seen as conquering the Shadow as his wish is to destroy the object which he, himself, had obsessed over.

I may have missed it, but was there any information on Uldred? Was it ever explained why he resorted to Blood Magic?

[Taleroth]

RunCDFirst wrote...

I may have missed it, but was there any information on Uldred? Was it ever explained why he resorted to Blood Magic?

Blood Magic wasn't his failing.  It was pride.  You can view his possession by a Pride demon as an extension of it.  Similar to Conner's desire to save his father lent him to possession by a Desire demon.  Both did so willingly.

Now, I don't quite remember what the clues where that he was a proud person.  I just recall Wynne didn't like him.  And that he thought Loghain would free them from the Chantry.

Modifié par Taleroth, 18 novembre 2009 - 07:52 .