108 réponses à ce sujet

[AlexXIV]

Shamajotsi wrote...

Kimberly Shaw wrote...

Avissel wrote...

The whole problem with a "neutral" choice is that they were setting it up for Hawke to matter on a global scale.

"The guy who walked away and did nothing." Isn't a very important figure.

/facepalm

In the scenario we have described, a neutral choice still has you fight the same end battles.

You were Champion and Viscount of the city where the Mage/Templar war started. You killed the First Enchanter AND the Knight Commander of the Templars.

What are you even talking about? Do you think before you type things?  Good lord sometimes I wonder about the average intelligence of the posters here. Please do defend yourself because I'm baffled why you would even type what you did.

You somehow missed the "global scale" part of the post. Avissel has a point that it won't do for Varric to say "For the mages, Hawke was like meh and never really cared about him..." because that is what could a neutral ending could be. In the other two endings, Hawke is significant not for whom he killed but for what side he chose. He is either a shiny example for the mages or a scarecrow. That's why even if there was a neutral ending it should not be limited only to "he kills Orsino and Meridith", but also has to have some sort of a global significance.

So I think you are the person who doesn't go into the not-so-small details of the posts of the others before going foamy-mouth .

And by the way, is there a way to change the name of the thread, because "Epic Fail" is not what we're discussing anymore ?

We are discussing epic fail. Because argueably that describes the ending for some people. Thing is the neutral ending is not really neutral. It is the second templar ending. It puts Hawke on the side of the templars, because ...

Templars fight mages, mages lose.
Orsino turns into a Harvester, wastes mages and templars alike.
Templars run for their lifes.
Hawke saves templars and Kirkwall.

That he did initially not pick a side doesn't play more of a role than the fact that Hawke was not the one who blew up the Chantry, but Anders. I mean Hawke is, in the eyes of the most people, the key element of what happened in Kirkwall while, as we now know, he/she isn't really. But stories tell a different truth. So the neutral ending still puts Hawke on the templar side, even if involuntarily. It's not more handwaving than the rest of the story really. Actually probably less.

Only difference to the other templar ending is that Hawke sides with the templars AFTER Orsino is exposed as a bloodmage.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 15 avril 2011 - 05:14 .

[Kimberly Shaw]

That's why even if there was a neutral ending it should not be limited only to "he kills Orsino and Meridith", but also has to have some sort of a global significance.

Actually, a HUGE part of the game (That you seem to have inexplicably missed?) is that Hawke's actions do not actually matter, it's only that the "tales" of what Hawke did as told through Varric and others and if/how he influenced Meredith or Orsino are what everyone is talking about. Really he was neutral, that is what Varric is saying to the Seeker, he had no choice and wasn't taking sides as much as everyone thinks he did.

So, no, actually, I stand by my post and think you have missed something.

Hawke is important in reality because he was champion of Kirkwall and defeated Meredith and Orsino when all this happened outside of his control. He is important to the Mage/Templar conflict because the "Tales" of his actions have reached the ears of everyone including the Seeker. Regardless of what he actually did, people believe he gave Meredith the idol on purpose and went to Kirkwall on purpose to stir trouble. That's the whole point of the game's narrative. Sorry you missed it.

[Rockpopple]

Exactly. Probably the only "neutral" ending that makes sense - the ending Shamajotsi outlined, is still in a way a de-facto Templar ending, just to a lesser extent. And it has the added detriment of not having a global outlook to the whole Mage-Templar war that the other 2 endings do.

Hm... it is a pickle....

By the way, Kim, his actions do matter. Gameplay does not always equal plot.

In the Mage ending, word spreads out about Hawke not only because of Varric, but because Mages actually survived the Annullment of the Circle. Word spreads of Kirkwall's Champion risking his life and the lives of his companions to save Mages. This, along with Anders' actions give the other Circles the gumption to rebel.

In the Templar ending, word spreads out from Varric's word and other word of mouth that the Champion of Kirkwall risked his life and the life of his companions to involve himself in a battle he had little to do with. Of course they would emphasize how Hawke destroyed a blood mage Harvester and saved many Templar lives as a result. This would make him a bogeyman to other Circles throughout Thedas too.

There is a global component to this.

Modifié par Rockpopple, 15 avril 2011 - 05:23 .

[Kimberly Shaw]

And it has the added detriment of not having a global outlook to the whole Mage-Templar war that the other 2 endings do.

Again, the tales of the Champion are already out there and have no bearing on what actually happened. The Seeker is told the truth, and she believes before being told that Hawke had an agenda that he didn't actually have. So if he chooses neutral, the exact same world spreading rumours could have happened because he has really killed Meredith and Orsino and been there when it all happened.

This is not a hard stretch people.

[Shamajotsi]

AlexXIV wrote...

We are discussing epic fail. Because argueably that describes the ending for some people. Thing is the neutral ending is not really neutral. It is the second templar ending. It puts Hawke on the side of the templars, because ...

Templars fight mages, mages lose.
Orsino turns into a Harvester, wastes mages and templars alike.
Templars run for their lifes.
Hawke saves templars and Kirkwall.

That he did initially not pick a side doesn't play more of a role than the fact that Hawke was not the one who blew up the Chantry, but Anders. I mean Hawke is, in the eyes of the most people, the key element of what happened in Kirkwall while, as we now know, he/she isn't really. But stories tell a different truth. So the neutral ending still puts Hawke on the templar side, even if involuntarily. It's not more handwaving than the rest of the story really. Actually probably less.

Only difference to the other templar ending is that Hawke sides with the templars AFTER Orsino is exposed as a bloodmage.

I see no reason why it should be stated that at the end, after seeing what Orsino has done, Hawke choses the side of the templars. It could be that after seeing what the templars are capable of doing themselves (killing innoscent people, getting way too high on lyrium, etc.) he choses not to be on their side either.

Also,
"Templars fight mages, mages lose.
Orsino turns into a Harvester, wastes mages and templars alike.
Templars run for their lifes.
Hawke saves templars and Kirkwall."
applies to the "mage ending" as well . I don't think this makes it a "third templar ending".

Kimberly, what is the agenda that Cassandra think Hawke would have, if he was neutral? Just to make clear - this is not a rethorical question, I'm genuinly interested in what a good neutral ending there would have been.

Modifié par Shamajotsi, 15 avril 2011 - 05:23 .

[AlexXIV]

Shamajotsi wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

We are discussing epic fail. Because argueably that describes the ending for some people. Thing is the neutral ending is not really neutral. It is the second templar ending. It puts Hawke on the side of the templars, because ...

Templars fight mages, mages lose.
Orsino turns into a Harvester, wastes mages and templars alike.
Templars run for their lifes.
Hawke saves templars and Kirkwall.

That he did initially not pick a side doesn't play more of a role than the fact that Hawke was not the one who blew up the Chantry, but Anders. I mean Hawke is, in the eyes of the most people, the key element of what happened in Kirkwall while, as we now know, he/she isn't really. But stories tell a different truth. So the neutral ending still puts Hawke on the templar side, even if involuntarily. It's not more handwaving than the rest of the story really. Actually probably less.

Only difference to the other templar ending is that Hawke sides with the templars AFTER Orsino is exposed as a bloodmage.

I see no reason why it should be stated that at the end, after seeing what Orsino has done, Hawke choses the side of the templars. It could be that after seeing what the templars are capable of doing themselves (killing innoscent people, getting way too high on lyrium, etc.) he choses not to be on their side either.

Also,
"Templars fight mages, mages lose.
Orsino turns into a Harvester, wastes mages and templars alike.
Templars run for their lifes.
Hawke saves templars and Kirkwall."
applies to the "mage ending" as well . I don't think this makes it a "third templar ending".

Difference is that Hawke never officially takes position against templars. But he/she saves the templars and kirkwall, and that's what will be remembered. We don't really need a second mage ending. There is nothing wrong with the mage ending maybe aside from the fact that Orsino chooses the worst possible timing to transform into a blob. They could change that for all I care. What I want is a pro templar ending without commiting a genocidial knee jerk reaction.

A pro-templar or pro-mage flag is probably necessary for the sequel or expansion or dlc. Because that's why they forced you to pick a side to begin with. That's like the keep the base, destroy the base ending of ME2.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 15 avril 2011 - 05:30 .

[Kimberly Shaw]

Kimberly, what is the agenda that Cassandra think Hawke would have, if he was neutral? Just to make clear - this is not a rethorical question, I'm genuinly interested in what a good neutral ending there would have been.

Here's one that works and has no problems that I can surmise:

Hawke was de facto leader of Kirkwall becoming Viscount at the time of the the Knight Commander's death, and Hawke killed the Knight Commander. The Chantry was blown up by someone he knew and associated with. His sister was an Apostate (in all play throughs, Bethany is afraid of the Templars and an Apostate at some point). These things all would happen in a Neutral play though as described. So his motives in Seeker Cassandra's eyes told through tales are to end the Templar's tyranny over the Circle.

Of course, the Tales need not be truthful and could be anything as long as it involved Hawke being there when it happened, killing Meredith/Orsino, and being the Champion of the City when it went down. You don't think this would get him "global significance"?

Honestly no matter what playthrough and side you take the whole point of the narrative is that Hawke's tale that evereyone believes is a lie, and that he doesn't deserve the importance that people have given him. Really the idol or Anders does. That's exactly what the last lines Varric says to the Seeker is even! Eesh.

It's not a big leap.

[Rockpopple]

Aya... dude, once again, there is nothing that says that nobody out there knows the truth of what happened in Kirkwall. You're taking a small plot point and blowing it up until it obscures anything else.

Obviously some people know the truth other than Varric and Hawke and Hawke's companions. Survivors of the Gallows, for one. Any number of people would have gone and spread the truth to others.

Varric obviously was telling tall tales about Hawke as well. The Seekers needed to ferret out what was truth and what was fantasy, and what they knew for sure is that Varric was there, so he'd know.

That's what that was about. The stretch is thinking everyone in Thedas only knows the fiction when in fact only a majority of people know the fiction, but some people know the truth and they would have spread the truth around.

[AlexXIV]

Rockpopple wrote...

Aya... dude, once again, there is nothing that says that nobody out there knows the truth of what happened in Kirkwall. You're taking a small plot point and blowing it up until it obscures anything else.

Obviously some people know the truth other than Varric and Hawke and Hawke's companions. Survivors of the Gallows, for one. Any number of people would have gone and spread the truth to others.

Varric obviously was telling tall tales about Hawke as well. The Seekers needed to ferret out what was truth and what was fantasy, and what they knew for sure is that Varric was there, so he'd know.

That's what that was about. The stretch is thinking everyone in Thedas only knows the fiction when in fact only a majority of people know the fiction, but some people know the truth and they would have spread the truth around.

Just question is do people know or even believe the truth if they hear it?

[Rockpopple]

I'd say no. That's probably why Cassandra said "Screw this, I'm going to the source."

[Kimberly Shaw]

A few select people knowing the truth has no bearing on what I'm saying. Ridiculous of you to bring it up. It's what the vast majority of people believe that is making Hawke be a legend and a figurehead in the Mage/Templar war, not what a few people who survived the Gallows know.  The "true" story doesn't get out by the survivors in either Mage or Templar sided ending, why would it get out in a Neutral ending?

So - What are you even argueing about? Yes. A few people know the truth. How does that refute what I've just said about the Seeker believing rumours and not believing Varric until he's about half way through the story? (And she captured him to find the locations of the Champion initially, not to find out the truth about him--although maybe it's both).

Modifié par Kimberly Shaw, 15 avril 2011 - 06:52 .

[graavigala85]

The true ending to DA2 is Trollface on screen saying "insert 10$ to see 1minute more.... U MAD?"

[Ooga600]

When you side mage, they really aren't winning. The cutscene shows them nearly getting slaughtered and taking only a few templars with them. Many obviously haven't been trained for combat and die because of it. Yes, it would've been better if Orsino did his thing and then killed a bunch of templars before attacking you, but the mages were definitely not winning. When you go outside afterward there are still A LOT of templars.

Modifié par Ooga600, 15 avril 2011 - 08:34 .

[Ksandor]

Rockpopple wrote...

Aya... dude, once again, there is nothing that says that nobody out there knows the truth of what happened in Kirkwall. You're taking a small plot point and blowing it up until it obscures anything else.

Obviously some people know the truth other than Varric and Hawke and Hawke's companions. Survivors of the Gallows, for one. Any number of people would have gone and spread the truth to others.

Varric obviously was telling tall tales about Hawke as well. The Seekers needed to ferret out what was truth and what was fantasy, and what they knew for sure is that Varric was there, so he'd know.

That's what that was about. The stretch is thinking everyone in Thedas only knows the fiction when in fact only a majority of people know the fiction, but some people know the truth and they would have spread the truth around.

I think this obscurity is not a genius plot idea from Bioware. I think they made this game deliberately ambigious to appeal as many people as they can with totally different tastes. This also saved them from thinking about the plot too much. But I don't like such cultural relativism. If a game is so ambigious and relies on situational ethics and only circumstances then what about the story? What story is being told, really?

The first rule of telling a great story is to never cheat the reader. Imply the end slightly but never waver from the definite plot, narrative and the end. This is soap opera at its worst. For there is not even an opera to tell. There is only soap. Like most Hollywood movies. You watch them, if you are lucky you enjoy them and then you forget them, usually right after leaving the theater. Well I enjoy SOME movies but I did not enjoy this game.

Bioware even says that people don't get the idea that they do not tell the story of a character but they actually tell an event. This is crap. What event could be told as a story without focusing on characters? Consider Tolstoy's War and Peace... Without the characters what is in that book to tell? How that novel is a masterpiece of modern literature without the well developed, realistic characters Tolstoy created? What is the whole Star Trek chronology if not for the tales of the great captains like Kirk and Picard?

Bioware tries to cover up their fiasco. So they try to fool people in believing that they can tell a good story without using a character who is central to the story. Which cooking school you said you went to Boware? (partial quote from ME2). For you cook foolish ideas a lot.

This is a sequel yes, but each game should be holistic in itself. Each game should read like a novel or play out like a movie. If you are talking about RPG anyway. This game is a series of disjointed episodes and tasks. It reminds me the remake of Charlie's Angels. A meaningless series of action and music clips.

I watched Star Wars: Empires Strikes Back you see? Yes I am being sarcastic. Even if they did not improve on but only imitated that movie this could still be a great game.

Modifié par Ksandor, 15 avril 2011 - 09:49 .

[Alamar2078]

Rockpopple wrote...

I stand corrected then. I couldn't find anyone refer to that in my playthrough but apparently I didn't look hard enough.

In any case, I do wonder how a "none-of-the-above" choice would have worked. The mechanics of it, I mean. How would Hawke had been drawn into the ending not choosing a side? Or would he have been pulled into the battle at the Gallows at all? Hm...

As many folks have stated siding with the people [not Mages or Templars] could have been done.  If nothing else you could hear rumors that Orisino has tapped into the power that is "The Enigma of Kirkwall" and threatens to destroy the city.  You go to the gallows, fight Orisino.   Merrill later comes by and being b@tsh!t crazy starts attacking you giving you in essense the same ending.

Personally I would have liked trying to stop mages from casting devistating spells in the city.  On top of this you may have to stop Templars from trying to commandeer siege equipment / weapons / etc. and fight alongside the city guard to stop them from doing this.  You could even go district by district trying to save as many people as you could before being pulled to the Gallows for XYZ / made up / whatever reason to finish off the bosses.

[Torax]

 What I wanted this thread to be about.

[wowpwnslol]

Urazz wrote...

Actually scenario 2 is that the Champion helps routes some templar attacks but things still look bleak and that the templars could still wipe out the mages of Kirkwall.  Orsino's reasoning for transforming into a Harvester regardless of the scenarios is to buy time for other mages to escape the Gallows and spread word to the other Circles of what happened in Kirkwall.

Personally, they could've easily set it up to fight both bosses when you choose the mage side of the conflict.

If The Champion sides with mages - templars get pretty much wiped out. Meredith is down to few men. She has no choice but to fight herself because she has nothing left. The Champion has beaten Ancient Rock Wraith, High Dragon, hordes of darkspawn etc. Templars are nothing to him. That's why it doesn't make sense. The Champion has the power to wipe out either faction. But Orsino, even on the verge of victory turns on you. Sloppy writing.


I also find it amusing that when you side with mages and wipe out pretty much all templars in Kirkwall, you're only going to be arrested, according to Cullen - same thing that was going to happen to you if you side with Meredith. Bloody ridiculous.

Modifié par wowpwnslol, 16 avril 2011 - 04:13 .

[tausra]

I believe the global impact of a neutral ending would cast Hawke as a revolutionary. Hawke's friend blew up the Chantry; Hawke refused to help the Templars Annul the circle; Hawke fought the horrors of blood magic head on to save Kirkwall. Hawke breaks the chains which enslave the common folk of Thedas, the Chantry, Fear of Blood Magic, and the alien Qunari.

[jds1bio]

Once everything blows up, I really think Hawke needs to leave the city no matter what. In keeping with the theme of no real choices, there's nothing the champion could do about it. People are too crazy at that point.

It would have been nice for Hawke to leave Kirkwall after KCM and Orsino, go to Sundermount to open the amulet, and see Flemeth at the end of the game to bookend Varric's story. That really would have thrown Cassandra for a loop.

[Kimberly Shaw]

At last, some reasonable people posting. Refreshing next to Rockpopple who can't conceive of a neutral ending working.

[KingJason13]

Let's be honest with ourselves: this game's plot has major issues and this whole "it can have issues because Varric may be lying/forgetting/exaggerating" is all a rationalization on the part of people desperate to defend the game from criticism.

- Why does Orsino even know Blood Magic!?! He spends his time proselitizing about the virtues of the Circle, railing against Blood Magic, and then pulls out a whoppper of a spell, ONLY to attack his allies INSTEAD of the enemy!?!?! How did he learn said powerful spell? Is Blood Magic really that easy? Just browsing through a tome grants someone that MUCH power!?! Wouldn't he have had to study it , in depth, to be able to cast such a badass spell? Wouldn't this go against everything he's been trying to say? I don't know, like someone else mentioned, if this plot point was handled better it may have been believable. MAYBE.

- Why am I forced to kill almost EVERY Mage I help? Why did the main quest line force me to work for the very person I was opposing to advance the story!?!?! Why was I forced to kill everyone at the Mage/Templar meeting EVEN when I was on their side!?!?! Why do the majority of Mages in the game use Blood Magic? I sided with the Mages because of their oppression... and then they nearly ALL turn out to be irredeemable douches!?!

IT MAKES NO SENSE!

The story is bad in all three chapters. BUT it's especially craptastic in the third act. Truth is: they had an interesting enough story idea... it just never manifested. And the ending is entirely contrived to be a catch-all for the lack of any real choice in the game... ARRRGGGHHH!!! Not to mention the cliffhanger ending's completion will most likely be purchasable for another $10-15...

- Why do I feel like Bioware has kicked me in the balls?

Do you feel my pain?

Modifié par KingJason13, 16 avril 2011 - 07:43 .

[KingJason13]

On a side note: wouldn't it be sardonically hillarious if Bioware pulled the ULTIMATE RESOURCE RECYCLE and just had DA3 be the same story... just not told by Varric. "The REAL events from Hawke's own eyes!" (I wonder if that's what it would finally take to annoy the "I play it for the party interaction... not the exploration" people)

Modifié par KingJason13, 16 avril 2011 - 07:52 .

[KingJason13]

...Maybe David Cage should join Bioware...

[Augustei]

PlumPaul82393 wrote...

agreed absolutely horrible ending. No choice as was all of DA2

[Augustei]

Plaintiff wrote...

Even if they were winning, (which is not the impression I got, having sided with the mages), battle can be quite traumatic. He's surrounded by death on all sides, you really expect him to be upbeat?

Even if he was traumatised by all the death couldn't he have done something more useful like kill himself to deal with it?