164 réponses à ce sujet

[Raphael diSanto]

The backdrop is the story of what I'm currently calling The Implosion Of Kirkwall, and the story of DA2 is how Hawke is caught up in those events. I'm obviously not being very clear. I give up.

[Alex109222]

Orsino: We've been acused of harbouring and being blood mages! They are going to wipe us out!
WELP! Better proove them right!

[JasmoVT]

It certainly is a matter of taste with no right or wrong except what shows up in Electronic Arts quarterly financial report which should be out the first of May.

I enjoyed the iconoclastic game design while I can understand why others my not have. I find most of the changes (combat excepted) made the game feel more realistic. I don't get to dress my companions up like they were my paper dolls. What kind of psychopath does that with their friends anyway. I do not control the arc of history, I do not even control the entire arc of my own life, but I do from time to time have to make choices about who I am and what I stand for. I know some will say that escape from reality is what they want to get away from by playing fantasy games, but for me, the more real the basic feel of the game the more immersive the fantasy.

I am not saying I would like every rpg in the future to be like this, but I would defiitely like to see more games like this.

I do hope they produce some good DLC to tack on to this. Biowares record with DLC has been very mixed in my opinion. While their have been a few good bit, most of it feels like unfinished pieces they took out of the game and then say "Hey, it is not what we want but I bet we can get folks to buy it anyway." and of course folks bought it so now DLC is a major part of the EA profit plan for the coming year.

[Alex109222]

JasmoVT wrote...

It certainly is a matter of taste with no right or wrong except what shows up in Electronic Arts quarterly financial report which should be out the first of May.

I enjoyed the iconoclastic game design while I can understand why others my not have. I find most of the changes (combat excepted) made the game feel more realistic. I don't get to dress my companions up like they were my paper dolls. What kind of psychopath does that with their friends anyway. I do not control the arc of history, I do not even control the entire arc of my own life, but I do from time to time have to make choices about who I am and what I stand for. I know some will say that escape from reality is what they want to get away from by playing fantasy games, but for me, the more real the basic feel of the game the more immersive the fantasy.

I am not saying I would like every rpg in the future to be like this, but I would defiitely like to see more games like this.

I do hope they produce some good DLC to tack on to this. Biowares record with DLC has been very mixed in my opinion. While their have been a few good bit, most of it feels like unfinished pieces they took out of the game and then say "Hey, it is not what we want but I bet we can get folks to buy it anyway." and of course folks bought it so now DLC is a major part of the EA profit plan for the coming year.

No more DLC, you said yourself, they removed chunks of the game to sell as DLC to make a bigger profit. That's the problem with DLC nowadays. The company don't care about you, all they really want is money in their pocket, cash in their hand and chedder in thier wallet.

[TUHD]

Although I at first only blamed Laidlaw for the disappointing game arc, I am starting to look at Gaider and his team of writers now too... sure, some parts of the story are pretty good. But the overall arc, most certainly the ending, is pretty weak :/

[AkiKishi]

The ending just made me feel like why did I bother. I already knew from the start what the ultimate ending was unless the game had somehow caught up in real time like AP and other games do.

[Raphael diSanto]

BobSmith101 wrote...

The ending just made me feel like why did I bother. I already knew from the start what the ultimate ending was unless the game had somehow caught up in real time like AP and other games do.

It's all about the journey....

[Alex109222]

Raphael diSanto wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

The ending just made me feel like why did I bother. I already knew from the start what the ultimate ending was unless the game had somehow caught up in real time like AP and other games do.

It's all about the journey....

And even the journey was boring.

[AkiKishi]

Raphael diSanto wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

The ending just made me feel like why did I bother. I already knew from the start what the ultimate ending was unless the game had somehow caught up in real time like AP and other games do.

It's all about the journey....

I don't think that works unless the PC has amnesia.

[Obadiah]

Vicious wrote...
...
His existence is a non issue. Even the DA:O DLC managed to trash it when Morrigan said to the effect of 'oh i really didn't need it anyway' in Witch Hunt.

So it doesn't go against DA:O. You are just under the false impression that your decisions matter. They don't. They never did.

The only events that 'matter' are the ones you have NO control over as they are part of the plot. The Archdemon dead, and the war that DA2 ends in. Those are the events that 'matter.'
...

Uh no.  A simple counter-example is picking the ruler of Orzammar which is a big choice.

[Kenny Lim]

Isn't this a NO-SPOILERS section?

[AkiKishi]

Obadiah wrote...

Vicious wrote...
...
His existence is a non issue. Even the DA:O DLC managed to trash it when Morrigan said to the effect of 'oh i really didn't need it anyway' in Witch Hunt.

So it doesn't go against DA:O. You are just under the false impression that your decisions matter. They don't. They never did.

The only events that 'matter' are the ones you have NO control over as they are part of the plot. The Archdemon dead, and the war that DA2 ends in. Those are the events that 'matter.'
...

Uh no.  A simple counter-example is picking the ruler of Orzammar which is a big choice.

Matter to who is the realy question. In the case of Orzimmar both the Dwarf Noble and Commoner have a vested interest in who takes the throne. My Dwarf Noble took things rather personally. It mattered to him.

Does it matter to me as a player ? No, once the game is switched off nothing in the game matters to me. It's just a game after all.

[DKJaigen]

Obadiah wrote...

Vicious wrote...
...
His existence is a non issue. Even the DA:O DLC managed to trash it when Morrigan said to the effect of 'oh i really didn't need it anyway' in Witch Hunt.

So it doesn't go against DA:O. You are just under the false impression that your decisions matter. They don't. They never did.

The only events that 'matter' are the ones you have NO control over as they are part of the plot. The Archdemon dead, and the war that DA2 ends in. Those are the events that 'matter.'
...

Uh no.  A simple counter-example is picking the ruler of Orzammar which is a big choice.

No it isnt because it doesnt change the fact that you get dwarves your dwarven army regardless which ruler you choose.

[Raphael diSanto]

Alex109222 wrote...

Raphael diSanto wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

The ending just made me feel like why did I bother. I already knew from the start what the ultimate ending was unless the game had somehow caught up in real time like AP and other games do.

It's all about the journey....

And even the journey was boring for me.

There, fixed it for you. Personally, I thought it was a great story. A fine tragedy in the best of traditions, suffused from a very early point with a sense of impending doom and inevitability.

Modifié par Raphael diSanto, 13 avril 2011 - 02:35 .

[MorrigansLove]

Raphael diSanto wrote...

Alex109222 wrote...

Raphael diSanto wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

The ending just made me feel like why did I bother. I already knew from the start what the ultimate ending was unless the game had somehow caught up in real time like AP and other games do.

It's all about the journey....

And even the journey was boring for me.

There, fixed it for you. Personally, I thought it was a great story. A fine tragedy in the best of traditions, suffused from a very early point with a sense of impending doom and inevitability.

Did you think Act 3 was poorly written?

[Obadiah]

BobSmith101 wrote...
...
Does it matter to me as a player ? No, once the game is switched off nothing in the game matters to me. It's just a game after all.

If the only point of DAO was killing the Archemon, then the other choices would be irrelevant. But to those of us to whom the narrative surrounding the rally-of-allies did matter, the choices that lead up to and affected that final battle, as well as the pieces that are left in play (including even the Warden) and what happened to them afterwards is just as important.

DKJaigen wrote...
...
No it isnt because it doesnt change the fact that you get dwarves your dwarven army regardless which ruler you choose.

This was an example of a lasting narrative choice, if one cared at all about that fictional world. There are other choices that affect what armies the player has access to in the final battle.

Modifié par Obadiah, 13 avril 2011 - 03:19 .

[AkiKishi]

Obadiah wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...
...
Does it matter to me as a player ? No, once the game is switched off nothing in the game matters to me. It's just a game after all.

If the only point of DAO was killing the Archemon, then the other choices would be irrelevant. But to those us to whom the narrative surrounding the rally-of-allies did matter, the choices that lead up to and affected that final battle, as well as the pieces that are left in play (including even the Warden) and what happened to them afterwards is just as important.

That was in the line above the one you quoted.

[Obadiah]

BobSmith101 wrote...
...
That was in the line above the one you quoted.

Um sort of. Your point was that this particular plot point mattered if you were playing a particular origin in-game, which is true for the characters. Mine was more that good fiction just in general (Dragon Age:Origins in particular) matters to the consumer (the player) because they care about the characters and/or plot.

Modifié par Obadiah, 13 avril 2011 - 04:09 .

[Roxlimn]

Alex109222 wrote...

Orsino: We've been acused of harbouring and being blood mages! They are going to wipe us out!
WELP! Better proove them right!

Actually, at the point where Orsino uses blood magic, the templar were implementing the Right of Annulment.  This basically means that they're going to kill every single mage in Kirkwall Circle, no exceptions, no escape, no defense.  This goes beyond accusation.  They don't care about accusing anymore.  They're just going ahead and killing every mage regardless.

So Orsino was going to be killed regardless of what he did or what he stood for.  He had nothing to lose by using blood magic.

[Roxlimn]

Sabriana wrote...

I avoid choosing certain answers because they are labeled 'nice', 'sarcastic', or 'short-tempered'. Because they lock Hawke into a certain way of interaction which I can't change. That may be acceptable to you, but it isn't to me. I tried the 'sarcastic' personality, but she ended up being rude, out-of-place, unacceptable, improper, way out of line, and sometimes slightly psychotic.

Sorry, but that just won't do. My pixel people certainly can be sarcastic/nice/diplomatic/assertive, but *I* want to be the one that guides them. And I want to be the one that decides when they display a certain personality trait.

I don't want to be shocked at what comes out of her mouth. Just because a person is sarcastic/nice/etc. doesn't mean they have to be that way all the time, even in the most inappropriate way.

So, if you like being squeezed into one personality trait, fine. That's up to you, and you are entitled to your opinion. I simply do not share it, and I never will.

You can choose to be humorous in some instance and serious in others.  The game generally picks up in what circumstances you've chosen to be humorous and which not and outlines Hawke accordingly.  If you always choose "funny," then the game will assume that you always want to appear witty even when it's not appropriate.

[Kimberly Shaw]

So Orsino was going to be killed regardless of what he did or what he stood for. He had nothing to lose by using blood magic.

That's not true. None of my campnions were killed. He just thought he would be. The game didn't let you reason with him to say otherwise. It should have, his living beyond Meredith's death wouldn't have changed the game at all in any way except you'd have one less "AWESOME" boss fight. *sigh* It was poor writing.

If they wanted the player to kill Orsino, it should have been upon accusing him of helping Quentin kill your mother and the fall out from not stopping Quentin.

[Cutlass Jack]

Kimberly Shaw wrote...
That's not true. None of my campnions were killed. He just thought he would be. The game didn't let you reason with him to say otherwise. It should have, his living beyond Meredith's death wouldn't have changed the game at all in any way except you'd have one less "AWESOME" boss fight. *sigh* It was poor writing.

If they wanted the player to kill Orsino, it should have been upon accusing him of helping Quentin kill your mother and the fall out from not stopping Quentin.

Much as I like the game I must agree with this. I sighed very loudly when Orsinio did that. It was like the mages were determined to make me feel like an idiot for supporting them.

On the other hand confronting him about Quentin would have been much better.

Modifié par Cutlass Jack, 13 avril 2011 - 05:44 .

[_Aine_]

Kimberly Shaw wrote...

So Orsino was going to be killed regardless of what he did or what he stood for. He had nothing to lose by using blood magic.

If they wanted the player to kill Orsino, it should have been upon accusing him of helping Quentin kill your mother and the fall out from not stopping Quentin.

This!  No mention of it was worse than orsino just suddenly having a fit and turning, despite having me help the bugger.  I wanted my character to scream at him. NOW??? Now you turn to blood magic, you imbecile?!!  My next playthrough, I sided with the templars.  It was a happier ending, for *everyone*. Mages included.  (as per epilogue)

Orsino *could* have been a super cool character though to either befriend (or not, alternately).  It seems he got conceptualized, yet never fully realized.  

Modifié par shantisands, 13 avril 2011 - 05:54 .

[Persephone]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

Kimberly Shaw wrote...
That's not true. None of my campnions were killed. He just thought he would be. The game didn't let you reason with him to say otherwise. It should have, his living beyond Meredith's death wouldn't have changed the game at all in any way except you'd have one less "AWESOME" boss fight. *sigh* It was poor writing.

If they wanted the player to kill Orsino, it should have been upon accusing him of helping Quentin kill your mother and the fall out from not stopping Quentin.

Much as I like the game I must agree with this. I sighed very loudly when Orsinio did that. It was like the mages were determined to make me feel like an idiot for supporting them.

On the other hand confronting him about Quentin would have been much better.

It's only made WORSE by the fact that you CAN confront him if you support the templars.

Much as I love DAII, Orsino's Act III reveal was a huge WTF moment.

[Cody211282]

Alex109222 wrote...

Orsino: We've been acused of harbouring and being blood mages! They are going to wipe us out!
WELP! Better proove them right!

Thus proving you don't need any sort of intelligence to actauly be First Enchanter.