147 réponses à ce sujet

[brightblueink]

Foolsfolly wrote...
[snip]
However, American Beauty is a great film. The movie's plot is about how a dead man (emotionally, mentally, physically, and career-wise) finds himself....ironically right before he dies. It's about self-discovery. Wonderful film. Nothing at all like DA2 since the game's not really about Hawke and Hawke's vague motivations. If it were more focused on Hawke and Hawke had character growth then there'd be a case here..

I brought American Beauty up because I honestly felt like DA2 was a similar case. I felt like the game was as focused as much on Hawke's growth (and that of the party members) as it was on Mages VS Templars, if not more. The emotional growth isn't quite as strong (since they needed to allow the players to fill in that aspect to allow them to roleplay--I felt like Hawke grew a lot emotionally, but that was because I purposefully was building how she was in my head), but the "rise to power" aspect of the plot is still there. All of the characters are involved in the plot outside of just being part of Hawke's party--Anders is absolutely essential to the events of Act III, Varric is connected through his brother, Isabela is a major driving force behind the conflict with the Qunari, etc. How they grow and change, affected by your actions, is a big part of the story as well. And as someone else noted earlier in the thread, each act helps set the stage for the eventual conflict--Varric could have told Cassandra just Act III to explain how the conflict reached it's boiling point, but it wouldn't have explained why Meredith's sword was important, why Hawke had the power to be such a driving force in the conflict in the first place, why Anders reached the breaking point he did, etc. Knowing the full story really does paint the full picture for Cassandra--and it also helps us understand Hawke (partially through our own roleplaying of his or her choices) and the party members.

[Maria Caliban]

Foolsfolly wrote...

But solving these other problems, like the Circle or Werewolves or collecting pieces of a Star Map, or an amulet or anything were all steps towards something. It was like stops on a story path.

A protagonist has a goal. In the case of DA:O, that goal is 'Stop the Archdemon.' In BioWare games, however, the things you have to do to accomplish the story goal have nothing to do with the goal itself. They're often utterly unrelated.

Freeing a bunch of werewolves from a curse has nothing to do with stopping the darkspawn or killing the Archdemon.

When you have a clear goal and way you accomplish the goal is through a series of unrelated tasks, you have an unfocused plot. If you had someone play through *only* the mages tower and asked them what the game was about, they'd have no idea what a darkspawn, Grey Warden, or archdemon was. It's the same with the Becillian forest or Redcliffe/Sacred Ashes.

Orzammar was the only place where the plot actually tied into the protagonist's goal.

[Torax]

DA:O = Fereldon and it's point of view on things. Very simple and it was at the being racked by Dark Spawn. Hero eventually saves the day while spending far too much time solving the problems of everybody around them.

DAII = Kirkwall in all it's mess. Point of View of many in that region in regards to how they see things (A bit of it in conflict with many you met in Fereldon) for better or worse. Like in Origins Hawke has no say in the matter and has to do what others want to continue the story. The scope is smaller though. All of Fereldon vs. the Blight while this time it's just Kirkwall against it'self with a terrorist of a companion thrown in the mix for flavor.

Mass Effect = Shepard is thrust into politics cause of what others want. No say in the matter. Eventually hunts down a trader only to find out his real enemies are far away. Fighting a faction of robots and their trader of a leader. It ends and they're a hero though they let some people die.

ME2 = Thrust into more stuff Shepard cannot control. Gets a bigger ship at least. Following a guy you can't trust. Knowing some enemy is still looming that you don't get to see. Instead you fight servants working for them. Yet again...

The only real difference between any of this is that ME2 just polished up some things from ME1 without really letting you fight this looming threat as a cop out for a sequel. Since Dragon Age has so many looming threats it's not like you could focus on one only. So you'll have to understand that it's more about Kirkwall just the rest of the Thedas maybe reading into it for their own means. Could it have been written stronger? Sure. But it's more like not agreements on the story telling than about Plot. Most games have looming threat. Truly the looming threat was Anders just if they gave more hints than they did it would have shocked many less I bet.

Move on to another game that may have more of proper thought cause most games do not and make you spend most of your time solving random problems for characters you meet.

[88mphSlayer]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Foolsfolly wrote...

But solving these other problems, like the Circle or Werewolves or collecting pieces of a Star Map, or an amulet or anything were all steps towards something. It was like stops on a story path.

A protagonist has a goal. In the case of DA:O, that goal is 'Stop the Archdemon.' In BioWare games, however, the things you have to do to accomplish the story goal have nothing to do with the goal itself. They're often utterly unrelated.

Freeing a bunch of werewolves from a curse has nothing to do with stopping the darkspawn or killing the Archdemon.

When you have a clear goal and way you accomplish the goal is through a series of unrelated tasks, you have an unfocused plot. If you had someone play through *only* the mages tower and asked them what the game was about, they'd have no idea what a darkspawn, Grey Warden, or archdemon was. It's the same with the Becillian forest or Redcliffe/Sacred Ashes.

Orzammar was the only place where the plot actually tied into the protagonist's goal.

the entire sub-plot about Loghain was kind of lost in the crowd as well, by the time we got to deal with Loghain i had kind of forgotten what the point was of doing a coup detat in the middle of a blight, in fact doing nothing might've been better for denerim in the end anyways

[Furtled]

brightblueink wrote...

And again, I reject the idea that Dragon Age 2 *doesn't* have a clear goal in the first place because of this. Cassandra asks a question, the same question that the plot asks. The story answers it, piece by piece. It's episodic, but it's still clear throughout the story where this is going to go, and by the end we know why the events matter. Hawke, themselves, might not have a goal outside of what we choose--but again, this is a roleplaying choice Bioware has given us.

I love American Beauty, it's a masterful bit of film making, but the key difference with both examples you give is they're passive forms of entertainment, interaction is limited to watching/reading; (imo only obviously) with a game of this type you need to have more than that.

Agreed the game's framed as answering Cassandra's question, and if it were a book or film that would be enough, but in a game like DA2 you need a more active plot. Overall I personally don't have much issue with the sub-plots in Acts 1 & 2 (Act 1 sets out a clear and logical goal to take the Hawkes out of poverty, Act 2 is a bit woolier but the Qunari sub-plot is strong enough to ignore the lack of personal goals for your PC), unfortunately it falls apart utterly in Act 3.
Simply telling Cassandra the story doesn't allow the player to take ownership of that goal because we're not playing as Cassandra, so her achieving her goal has little import for us.

By Act 3, Hawke, the character we're supposed to be invested in, the character who is allegedly the third most powerful person in Kirkwall; is still doing the same type of things they did as a penniless refugee. Hawke (and through them the player) has no clear goal to strive for, no fully fleshed out ambitions to be thwarted by what happens when the two warring factions finally clash. And the lack of screentime for either of the main antagonists (along with some decidedly odd character decisions and choppy pacing) of that Act doesn't help.

I do admire the devs for taking the risks they did with the narrative framing and the decision to avoid the typical hero's journey, but (for me) the end result is sadly flawed on a lot of levels. I say sadly because with a little more thought, time and polish I think they could have created something utterly amazing.

Does that make sense?

Modifié par Furtled, 16 avril 2011 - 01:34 .

[Torax]

88mphSlayer wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

Foolsfolly wrote...

But solving these other problems, like the Circle or Werewolves or collecting pieces of a Star Map, or an amulet or anything were all steps towards something. It was like stops on a story path.

A protagonist has a goal. In the case of DA:O, that goal is 'Stop the Archdemon.' In BioWare games, however, the things you have to do to accomplish the story goal have nothing to do with the goal itself. They're often utterly unrelated.

Freeing a bunch of werewolves from a curse has nothing to do with stopping the darkspawn or killing the Archdemon.

When you have a clear goal and way you accomplish the goal is through a series of unrelated tasks, you have an unfocused plot. If you had someone play through *only* the mages tower and asked them what the game was about, they'd have no idea what a darkspawn, Grey Warden, or archdemon was. It's the same with the Becillian forest or Redcliffe/Sacred Ashes.

Orzammar was the only place where the plot actually tied into the protagonist's goal.

the entire sub-plot about Loghain was kind of lost in the crowd as well, by the time we got to deal with Loghain i had kind of forgotten what the point was of doing a coup detat in the middle of a blight, in fact doing nothing might've been better for denerim in the end anyways

I find it all kind of annoying. You got this whole looming threat but you spend your time instead clearing out slavers in the alienage and trying to get a bunch of nobles to turn on Loghain. Even though you end up just calling on the Redcliffe Knights during Final City Battle. That I could tell anyway  


p.s. I've been listening to the 1812 Overture since i mentioned it in this thread a while ago. lol

Modifié par Torax, 16 avril 2011 - 12:56 .

[brightblueink]

Furtled wrote...

I do admire the devs for taking the risks they did with the narrative framing and the decision to avoid the typical hero's journey, but (for me) the end result is sadly flawed on a lot of levels. I say sadly because with a little more thought, time and polish I think they could have ceated something utterly amazing.

Does that make sense?

It does, thank you! For me the plot was still satisfying enough, but I definitely agree that with more time to put into it, they could've made it better. I loved the story of DA2--but...it still does have flaws. and I think I can agree that Act III is probably the weakest part of the game, so in that frame of mind I can understand people's problems with it.

[Foolsfolly]

Ok, back.

As I was going to say before.

Were I asked, "What is this game about?" I would have to pause and think about it for a second.

Since I've had over a month to ponder this I have an answer, "It's about stirring up four plotlines to be resolved later."

In order of appearance: Flemeth is alive and doing something (this establishes she's alive, whereas before Morrigan did not think she was dead), there are Primeval thaigs older than anything else in Thedas, Arishok vows the Qunari will return so expect a qunari war in the future, and the Mage Templars kick off their conflict.

It's about one guy who kinda sees the beginnings of possibly one or two other stories for DA's future. It's kinda like the whole game is about causing ripples not resolving anything.

Now. That's how I'd summarize it. It's a fine story idea for something like comic books or a novel series but I don't think it works for video games because games are a larger investment of time and money than other forms of serial entertainment.

I think, if the point isn't Mages then the center of the story, the crux of the plot, should have been Hawke's rise to power. And this game does not do this. There's no one blocking Hawke's rise to power, there's no struggling to win it, there's no conflict about it.

It just happens, largely off camera, and always as a by-product of just doing quests without wanting to rise in power.

Had the game focused more on Hawke rising to power, overcoming some sort of problem (Kirkwall Nobles not wanting a Ferelden refugee to rise to any sort of power for example) then having Hawke in three stories that don't resolve wouldn't matter as much. Because we'd get resolution on Hawke's story, either raising to power, failing to raise, or proclaiming power without being given it.

Then there'd be a complete central story and the episodes that define each act would be backdrops to that central story.

Perhaps I am wrong on the Mage conflict being the central story. Perhaps it was meant to be Hawke's rise as the main plot....and they messed up that instead.

[Furtled]

brightblueink wrote...

It does, thank you! For me the plot was still satisfying enough, but I definitely agree that with more time to put into it, they could've made it better. I loved the story of DA2--but...it still does have flaws. and I think I can agree that Act III is probably the weakest part of the game, so in that frame of mind I can understand people's problems with it.

*Phew* I haven't done this much plot dissection since my Uni days - was worried I'd just ended up with a huge Merril-like ramble there

Modifié par Furtled, 16 avril 2011 - 01:42 .

[Foolsfolly]

I do admire the devs for taking the risks they did with the narrative framing and the decision to avoid the typical hero's journey, but (for me) the end result is sadly flawed on a lot of levels. I say sadly because with a little more thought, time and polish I think they could have ceated something utterly amazing.

Does that make sense? /images/forum/emoticons/blushing.png

It makes complete sense.

I don't want to come off as a hater of the game. I was disappointed by it but large aspects of it are enjoyable. The characters, dialogue, the Qunari conflict, and even the combat are great in this game. But there's problems with the story and it really comes down, to me, to a lack of a centralized plot.

I've harped on how the Mages should have been the main plot, because they're in so much of the game, Cassandra's questioning Varric about them, Bethany/Hawke is a mage, and the whole finale is strictly focused on mages.

To me, it makes the most sense for candidate for main plot. But, as I said before this post, if the plot had been more about Hawke and Hawke having a journey while these things happened (Qunari, Flemeth, Mage War, what-have-you) and the game wrapped up with Hawke achieving a goal or failing to achieve that goal (which ever), then the game would feel complete.

Instead it's missing that central plot. It's missing that point for all these actions. It doesn't have to be Mages, but if it's not Mages then it has to be about Hawke. And they didn't do enough with Hawke's rise or journey.

You can say that Hawke's supposed to be a blank character for the player to project onto, that's fine. RPGs have done that since the first RPG. But if Hawke's meant to be a player avatar then the plot should have been Mages.

Attempting to leave Hawke as blank as possible and have that rise be the main plot left both empty.

[boraxalmighty]

There is a centralized plot to this story: Hawke. Pay attention to what Cassandra is actually saying and it's easy to pinpoint the plot. She knows of Hawke through the legend. Varric is telling the "What really happened" story. All 3 acts are about significant moments in the legend being sorted out by Varric. He went to the deep roads to make money not to find the idol. He did not plan the events leading up to war with the Qunari. The plot simply comes down to who is Hawke and what did he really do. Who he is is up to you and what he really did is the plot.

[Uzzy]

Foolsfolly wrote...

Had the game focused more on Hawke rising to power, overcoming some sort of problem (Kirkwall Nobles not wanting a Ferelden refugee to rise to any sort of power for example) then having Hawke in three stories that don't resolve wouldn't matter as much. Because we'd get resolution on Hawke's story, either raising to power, failing to raise, or proclaiming power without being given it.

Then there'd be a complete central story and the episodes that define each act would be backdrops to that central story.

Perhaps I am wrong on the Mage conflict being the central story. Perhaps it was meant to be Hawke's rise as the main plot....and they messed up that instead.

You make a lot of very good points here. I agree that the game is very unfocused as to what it wants to be about, and it really does feel as if each Act is an entirely distinct story, rather then part of a greater one.

It's a real shame that Hawke becoming a noble was entirely glossed over, as we could have gotten some great political gameplay out of that, where we couldn't just solve all the problems by stabbing someone.

As for the Mages vs Templars, I do think that is the main focus of the game, but it's so badly done as to be a joke. The main players are introduced far too late, while the issues aren't really explored until the end. There was a great opportunity to explore this in the Ser Alrik quest as well, along with Bethany.

Ser Alrik: If we had the chance to, lets say, go talk to Cullen and raise the issue of Ser Alrik, that might have gotten us further into the complex relationship between the Templars and the Mages, and how that should work. It could also help show the Templars in a better light. Perhaps Cullen takes action based on Anders' accusations?

Bethany: Ok, seriously. Why didn't we get to see her in Act 2? That would, again, have been a great chance to let us see what conditions were like within the circle, from the mages perspective. If Gamlen can go see her, why can't an actual Noble? Again, this would have given us the chance to hear about Orsino, Meredith etc, while keeping the family aspect of the game alive. One could even petition Meredith to allow Bethany out for Mama Hawke's funeral, thus letting the player meet Meredith early on, and have a good discussion about the dangers of magic in the meanwhile. Hawke is, after all, a noble of some reputation who has helped out the Templars before now, so a meeting with Meredith isn't out of the question.

Basically, the main themes of the game were so muddled and confused that they really didn't come through, and that's DA2's biggest failing.

[Foolsfolly]

But without any development just having Hawke as the centralized plot is weak. Hawke doesn't strife for anything, no one or thing is in Hawke's way. Hawke just bumbles into storylines that don't finish (except for the Qunari storyline) and bumbles out.

What's the story reasoning for Viscount Hawke to just vanish, for example? There's nothing resembling a plot to Hawke's journey, too much is left undeveloped.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Mr Laidlaw evaded the question completely.

[Foolsfolly]

Uzzy wrote...

You make a lot of very good points here. I agree that the game is very unfocused as to what it wants to be about, and it really does feel as if each Act is an entirely distinct story, rather then part of a greater one.

It's a real shame that Hawke becoming a noble was entirely glossed over, as we could have gotten some great political gameplay out of that, where we couldn't just solve all the problems by stabbing someone.

As for the Mages vs Templars, I do think that is the main focus of the game, but it's so badly done as to be a joke. The main players are introduced far too late, while the issues aren't really explored until the end. There was a great opportunity to explore this in the Ser Alrik quest as well, along with Bethany.

Ser Alrik: If we had the chance to, lets say, go talk to Cullen and raise the issue of Ser Alrik, that might have gotten us further into the complex relationship between the Templars and the Mages, and how that should work. It could also help show the Templars in a better light. Perhaps Cullen takes action based on Anders' accusations?

Bethany: Ok, seriously. Why didn't we get to see her in Act 2? That would, again, have been a great chance to let us see what conditions were like within the circle, from the mages perspective. If Gamlen can go see her, why can't an actual Noble? Again, this would have given us the chance to hear about Orsino, Meredith etc, while keeping the family aspect of the game alive. One could even petition Meredith to allow Bethany out for Mama Hawke's funeral, thus letting the player meet Meredith early on, and have a good discussion about the dangers of magic in the meanwhile. Hawke is, after all, a noble of some reputation who has helped out the Templars before now, so a meeting with Meredith isn't out of the question.

Basically, the main themes of the game were so muddled and confused that they really didn't come through, and that's DA2's biggest failing.

It should go without saying that I agree. I also found it odd that either sibling can die before Act 2 and the entire family are taken out of the game as quickly as possible.

[Fast Jimmy]

People say that DA2 was focused on Hawke's growth as a character instead of the plot, but I disagree. It TRIED to be about Hawke as a character, but it failed to show any sort of emotional, situational or development growth across three Acts. Hawke is still the same (except with a different voice over depending on your paragon/renegade/snarky conversation choices)... the same reactions, the same dialogue, the same choices, over and over again. Multiple playthroughs show us nothing more about Hawke's journey. This could have just as easily been a Dragon Age novel, since there is no deviating from the set path and recycled environments don't show as badly in a book.

In short, I have no control over Hawke's rise to champion. There are no multiple paths or consequences that can be mitigated or dealt with. I see no affect on the world on the few choices I get. If I had a relationship with Isabelle but handed her over to the Quanari, it does nothing to the plot except that I lose one of the best rogue classes and DPS characters in combat.

If I don't do Varric's side quest, it doesn't change how his life ends up. If I help Merril fix the mirror or have her realize the folly of her ways, it does not change anything about her or her relationship with Hawke, except a few Relationship points that can be made up later. And we all know how the final "choice" matters... which is to say not at all. If Bioware makes it so that your choice shows up in a subsequent game, I don't see how they could make it any MORE than a little piece of dialogue or easter egg. Its so trivial.

If the game doesn't need a "plot" because it deals with Hawke's rise, then it needs something other to barrel towards the finish line while giving no evidence that Hawke's journey has mattered in the least.

[Foolsfolly]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Mr Laidlaw evaded the question completely.

He usually does. The writers on these boards however seem more honorable.

Not that I hold it against Laidlaw. The guy's doing PR, it's his job to lie and avoid.

[Fast Jimmy]

Let's quickly discuss what Kirkwall would have looked like if Hawke hadn't been there, shall we?

Hawke does not show up in Kirkwall and live as a refugee. He does not join Varric and Bartrand's expedition, which still goes down into the Deep Roads and the idol is recovered. The exception to this non-Hawke narrative is that Varric may die, but this will just mean that Cassandra will be questioning someone else about the events in Kirkwall.

Hawke does not engage the Qunari and does not help Isabella with her problems, resulting in her being killed (more than likely) and the book the Qunari want going to her emplyer, causing them to leave Kirkwall.

Orsino and Meredith still fight, Anders, still consumed by Justice, bombs the Chantry and causes the mage/templar civil war. Since it does not mater which side Hawke chooses, then it does not matter if he is there, as it will still cause the Circles to rebel worldwide, regardless of if the Mages or Templars win the fight.

I have just removed the main character of the game, where the plot is supposed to revolve around the main character, and it has changed next to nothing about how the plot ended up. Contrast this to Origins... if not for the Warden, no army would have been raised, Eamon would not have been saved, Loghain would not have been deposed, so the civil war would have let the darkspawn cover everything, Riordan would still have been locked in jail by Loghain, leaving Allistair the only Warden in the entire country that could take down the darkspawn.

The story flies off the tracks without the Warden. They don't even miss a beat without Hawke.

And that is why you fail.

[boraxalmighty]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Let's quickly discuss what Kirkwall would have looked like if Hawke hadn't been there, shall we?

Hawke does not show up in Kirkwall and live as a refugee. He does not join Varric and Bartrand's expedition, which still goes down into the Deep Roads and the idol is recovered. The exception to this non-Hawke narrative is that Varric may die, but this will just mean that Cassandra will be questioning someone else about the events in Kirkwall.

Hawke does not engage the Qunari and does not help Isabella with her problems, resulting in her being killed (more than likely) and the book the Qunari want going to her emplyer, causing them to leave Kirkwall.

Orsino and Meredith still fight, Anders, still consumed by Justice, bombs the Chantry and causes the mage/templar civil war. Since it does not mater which side Hawke chooses, then it does not matter if he is there, as it will still cause the Circles to rebel worldwide, regardless of if the Mages or Templars win the fight.

I have just removed the main character of the game, where the plot is supposed to revolve around the main character, and it has changed next to nothing about how the plot ended up. Contrast this to Origins... if not for the Warden, no army would have been raised, Eamon would not have been saved, Loghain would not have been deposed, so the civil war would have let the darkspawn cover everything, Riordan would still have been locked in jail by Loghain, leaving Allistair the only Warden in the entire country that could take down the darkspawn.

The story flies off the tracks without the Warden. They don't even miss a beat without Hawke.

And that is why you fail.

Or they don't get to the Deep Roads quickly enough because they don't find a partner to come up with my money for the expidition and since Hawke and his crew aren't there they don't have the muscle to push toward the ancient thaig and the idol is never found.

Hawke does not engage the qunari and doesn't help Isabella so the qunari besiege the city and convert/kill everyone in the city. If that happens Act 3 does not.

See what I did there?

[Foolsfolly]

You can't judge a plot by the importance of the main character alone. Likewise, speculation leads no where since anyone can speculate anything.

I mean, look at Inglorious Basterds. The Basterds are completely unnecessary, does that make the plot fail?

Or Brad Pitt's character in Seven. If he didn't exist nothing in that movie would have changed. Does that plot fail?

[88mphSlayer]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Mr Laidlaw evaded the question completely.

nah he answered it, he just used lingo & rhetoric to say "DA2 is a 30-40 hour origin story"

[boraxalmighty]

That speculation is intentional though. This is a fact vs legend tale. We're lead to believe that the events that transpired could be directly attributed to so grand scheme by Hawke and his allies only to find out that while he was at the forefront of most of these events, he was not directly responsible for them. The only negative I have for the story is that the legend is more or less glossed over instead of being more thoroughly explained in the beginning. Cassandra mentions it several times and references it in her questioning, but explaining the legend first would have made it easier for everyone to understand.

[txgoldrush]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

People say that DA2 was focused on Hawke's growth as a character instead of the plot, but I disagree. It TRIED to be about Hawke as a character, but it failed to show any sort of emotional, situational or development growth across three Acts. Hawke is still the same (except with a different voice over depending on your paragon/renegade/snarky conversation choices)... the same reactions, the same dialogue, the same choices, over and over again. Multiple playthroughs show us nothing more about Hawke's journey. This could have just as easily been a Dragon Age novel, since there is no deviating from the set path and recycled environments don't show as badly in a book.

In short, I have no control over Hawke's rise to champion. There are no multiple paths or consequences that can be mitigated or dealt with. I see no affect on the world on the few choices I get. If I had a relationship with Isabelle but handed her over to the Quanari, it does nothing to the plot except that I lose one of the best rogue classes and DPS characters in combat.

If I don't do Varric's side quest, it doesn't change how his life ends up. If I help Merril fix the mirror or have her realize the folly of her ways, it does not change anything about her or her relationship with Hawke, except a few Relationship points that can be made up later. And we all know how the final "choice" matters... which is to say not at all. If Bioware makes it so that your choice shows up in a subsequent game, I don't see how they could make it any MORE than a little piece of dialogue or easter egg. Its so trivial.

If the game doesn't need a "plot" because it deals with Hawke's rise, then it needs something other to barrel towards the finish line while giving no evidence that Hawke's journey has mattered in the least.

Hawke's development and growth is decided by the player. At many times, the players chooses what views Hawke will voice in a situation. You can have grow from refugee to a mediator who sees both sides, and wants to get involved and help people. Or you can be an extremist and grow to the point where you allow Meredith to kill your own sister (that scene makes me want to throw up). You grow how you want to.

The Witcher was the same way...Geralt grew how you want him to. There was even a quest called "Identity" which lets you define Geralts views on life and his relationships. Its the only quest that actually never completes.

[sphinxess]

boraxalmighty wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Let's quickly discuss what Kirkwall would have looked like if Hawke hadn't been there, shall we?

Hawke does not show up in Kirkwall and live as a refugee. He does not join Varric and Bartrand's expedition, which still goes down into the Deep Roads and the idol is recovered. The exception to this non-Hawke narrative is that Varric may die, but this will just mean that Cassandra will be questioning someone else about the events in Kirkwall.

Hawke does not engage the Qunari and does not help Isabella with her problems, resulting in her being killed (more than likely) and the book the Qunari want going to her emplyer, causing them to leave Kirkwall.

Orsino and Meredith still fight, Anders, still consumed by Justice, bombs the Chantry and causes the mage/templar civil war. Since it does not mater which side Hawke chooses, then it does not matter if he is there, as it will still cause the Circles to rebel worldwide, regardless of if the Mages or Templars win the fight.

I have just removed the main character of the game, where the plot is supposed to revolve around the main character, and it has changed next to nothing about how the plot ended up. Contrast this to Origins... if not for the Warden, no army would have been raised, Eamon would not have been saved, Loghain would not have been deposed, so the civil war would have let the darkspawn cover everything, Riordan would still have been locked in jail by Loghain, leaving Allistair the only Warden in the entire country that could take down the darkspawn.

The story flies off the tracks without the Warden. They don't even miss a beat without Hawke.

And that is why you fail.

Or they don't get to the Deep Roads quickly enough because they don't find a partner to come up with my money for the expidition and since Hawke and his crew aren't there they don't have the muscle to push toward the ancient thaig and the idol is never found.

Hawke does not engage the qunari and doesn't help Isabella so the qunari besiege the city and convert/kill everyone in the city. If that happens Act 3 does not.

See what I did there?

There is already a partner waiting in the wings with the gold - they just don't like him very much

Seriously? One boatload of Qunari can take over a city state? At best Hawke getting inside first maybe saves a few Nobles that might have been killed when Merediths forces attacked.

Modifié par sphinxess, 16 avril 2011 - 07:34 .

[Fast Jimmy]

boraxalmighty wrote...

Or they don't get to the Deep Roads quickly enough because they don't find a partner to come up with my money for the expidition and since Hawke and his crew aren't there they don't have the muscle to push toward the ancient thaig and the idol is never found.

Hawke does not engage the qunari and doesn't help Isabella so the qunari besiege the city and convert/kill everyone in the city. If that happens Act 3 does not.

See what I did there?

Yes, I did...

I don't know how they couldn't get to the Deep Roads "quickly" enough to recover an idol that is roughly a 1000 years old.

The Warden killed a 100 qunari on his way to save Ferelden from the Blight. We see Meredith and Orsino already on their way to drive out the qunari forces. Without their cannons and gunpowder, just holed up in the Viscount's palace, they would have stood no long term chance of survival. Also, without Hawke's help to Isabella, the Qunari could very well have recovered the artifact and not had any incident.

And you didn't even touch on the so-called "climax" of the story, the Mage/Templar fight. Which, at the end of the day, is the source of most people's gripes.

Not trying to be a negative Nancy here, but I'm getting a little irked at people trying to explain the concept of plot and narrative structure on these boards like we all haven't taken middle school English Composition and saying their understanding of literary devices makes the fact that the majority of people who played DA2 did not enjoy the plot somehow a deficiency in their ability to recognize good story telling. The majority's preference does not always make right, but when the same people can play one game (DA:O), enjoy it immensely, and play a second game based on the same principles and made by the same people but have a significantly lower response, something is wrong.

I personally told every gamer I know to go out and buy DA:O when it came out. I haven't told a single person to go buy DA2. And I think sales reflect that.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 16 avril 2011 - 08:17 .