843 réponses à ce sujet

[Rockpopple]

You asked for it.

MASSIVE SPOILERS BELOW IF YOU CAN READ BETWEEN THE LINES. YOU'VE BEEN WARNED!

You can choose to save your <spoiler> from <spoiler> of the Blight in the Deep Roads, or you can make them a <spoiler>. If they <spoiler>, they're <spoiler>, they don't come back. As <spoilers> they're temporarily a part of the plot in the future of both acts. Or you can have your sister become a <spoiler> or your brother become a <spoiler>.

You can betray <spoiler>, causing her to leave your party and <spoiler>, or you can develop a friendship with her and she <spoiler> in the last minute to aid you fighting the <spoiler>. You can even betray her AGAIN at this point by turning her into the <spoiler>, losing her forever.

You can side with <spoiler> and kill your own <spoiler> if she's <spoiler>, or you can decide to spare her. Or you can side with the <spoiler> and have them <spoiler>.

You can ****** off <spoiler> where she decides instead of <spoiler> she goes off to <spoiler> instead.

You can decide to <spoiler> Fenris to <spoiler> or you can <spoiler>. If you <spoiler>, he's <spoiler>. You can kill <spoiler>or keep him on your side. Etc.

And there are many more that I missed. Stop lying about the game.

[Dragoonlordz]

Rockpopple wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

cljqnsnyc wrote...

What role do you play in DA2's finale outcome?

Hawke determines who wins the first battle in a larger conflict, and whether or not he is publicly seen to endorse the police state or terrorism.  He is also a hero to one side and a villain to another.  The battle of course, still takes place.

What role do you play in DAOs outcome?  You pick who - if anyone - dies killing the Archdemon.  It still dies.  Just as (spoiler) and (spoiler) still die.  

The point that seems to be interwoven through this conversation is that both games are about the journey.  To some, this means setting worldstate/plot flags in totally unrelated locations.  To me, this means having a character with a purpose and desire that matters not only to him, but the characters around him.

1. Save the Anvil or Destroy the Anvil - You get dwarves or Golems to aid you. Does this choice matter in the final battle? Nope.

2. Side with the Keeper or side with the Werewolves - You get Dalish or Werewolves to aid you. Does this choice matter in the final battle? Nope.

3. Save Redcliffe or let it burn - Does this choice aid you in the final battle? Nope.

4. Save the Circle or Annul the Circle - Mages or Templars aid you. Does this choice matter in the final battle? Nope.

5. Put Alistair on the throne, or Anora, or Alistair and Anora. Let Loghain live or kill him - Does this choice matter in the final battle? Very little.

That's the reality of the situation.

Don't go there because I will tear DA2 apart on the same principles. DA2 choices had no more effect on the end battle than DAO ones. From Act 1, making money and finding idol has no more or less effect than finding the deeds to force allies to join battle against blight in DAO. Act 2, Arishok is no more or less different than stopping Logain. Act 3 has an end boss fight (in DA2) it's split between 2 bosses as opposed to one in (DAO) either title both have massive impact on the world, if you don't kill the archdemon the world would possibly be in ruins under the rampage of the blight, in DA2 the mages and templars run amok instead. 

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 18 avril 2011 - 04:51 .

[upsettingshorts]

I think the reason they "went there" is to show how the games are very similar in terms of their amount of choice, and that DA2 doesn't "lack" and thing that DAO "had" in that respect beyond epilogue cards.

And I agree.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 18 avril 2011 - 04:52 .

[cljqnsnyc]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

cljqnsnyc wrote...

It seems to me you're not really interested in a conversation about DA2.

Show me a poster who hasn't already become entrenched in their own conclusions, and I'll have a conversation.

cljqnsnyc wrote...

arrogant

Yup.

cljqnsnyc wrote...

ignorant

Nope.

Unlike you, I have no problem allowing someone else their own opinions...and I don't need to use snark, insults, or arrogance to get my points across. 

You enjoy the rest of your day.

[Rockpopple]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Don't go there because I will tear DA2 apart on the same principles. DA2 choices had no more effect on the end battle than DAO ones. From Act 1, making money and finding idol has no more or less effect than finding the deeds to force allies to join battle against blight in DAO. Act 2, Arishok is no more or less different than stopping Logain. Act 3 has an end boss fight (in DA2) it's split between 2 bosses as opposed to one in (DAO) either title both have massive impact on the world, if you don't kill the archdemon the world would possibly be in ruins under the rampage of the blight, in DA2 the mages and templars run amok instead. 

Except I never claimed DA2's choices had more effect on the end battle than DA:O. Read my previous posts. I never stated that. I stated the other way around, that DA:O's choices had no more effect on the end battle than with DA2, and you just agreed with me. You're welcome.

[T764]

In Origins you are made to be the focus of the story due to the stupidity and incompetence of the rest of the world. In DA2 you are dragged in events by virtue of being the champion.
I would rather feel that events could resolve themselves without my involvement than to belive that i HAD to solve eveything just because i'm the hero.

[AlanC9]

Upsettingshorts wrote...
The choices are there, there are no epilogue cards to spoon feed you which outcomes had which consequences.  Bioware failed to predict how many people would fail to understand this.  

Do you ever get the feeling that a lot of the criticisms of DA2 boil down to the game not being dumbed down enough?

[Rockpopple]

@ AlanC9 - HA! Absolutely.

[upsettingshorts]

cljqnsnyc wrote...

Unlike you, I have no problem allowing someone else their own opinions...and I don't need to use snark, insults, or arrogance to get my points across. 

You clearly know me so well.  It couldn't possibly be that I'm persistently insulted by people who simply presume I must not have played DAO, or am part of some new audience, or enjoy button->awesome, or can't read because I prefer VA, or like exploding corpses, or any number of ignorant and dismissive reasons why I must prefer DA2 to DAO.  In fact, it isn't as if many of those examples haven't been used in this very thread.  Even when I start out very differently. 

The difference is few people are called out for how stupid and wrong those comments are.  Sometimes I feel like doing just that.  Then I get to be the ****.  Difference is, I don't really care much one way or the other.  People don't want discussion, they want a fight.  Sometimes I give them one.

AlanC9 wrote...

Do you ever get the feeling that a lot of the criticisms of DA2 boil down to the game not being dumbed down enough?

Some of them, yeah.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 18 avril 2011 - 04:58 .

[AkiKishi]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

He's refering to how certain things are retconned or just ignored by the writers.

Riiight.  Because the writers are going to be able to accomodate every possible endgame state dreamed up by every player.  

Ambiguity is a gift for those with an imagination.

BobSmith101 wrote...

If DA2 was The Usual Suspects. Varric would be Keyser Soze and Hawke would just be the poor shmuck he set up to take the fall.

No.

The writers are responsible for those states. They are also responsibile for continuity between games. Retconning is lazy. Ignoring something just because it does not fit your idea of where the story is going is worse.

Varric is the one telling the story. Everything that he tells already happened years before.

[addiction21]

cljqnsnyc wrote...


Unlike you, I have no problem allowing someone else their own opinions...and I don't need to use snark, insults, or arrogance to get my points across. 

You enjoy the rest of your day.

Wow. Its like that poster that called Sylvius the Mad a BW fanboy.

[upsettingshorts]

What was retconned, aside from:

1) Anders, who may have died in DAA
2) Qunari horns
3) Sister Nightengale

Seems like minor things when compared to DAA making my Warden who hates the Wardens remain a Warden.  Or indeed saying that the only Warden who could follow Morrigan into the mirror had to consider her a romantic interest and not simply either a concerned friend or something pretending to be a concerned friend... the list goes on...

addiction21 wrote...

Wow. Its like that poster that called Sylvius the Mad a BW fanboy.

That was hilarious.  

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 18 avril 2011 - 05:12 .

[TJSolo]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

I don't care how clever you think you're being. Your point is still not only irrelevant, but not actually a counterargument to what I was saying. It is, in its own clumsy way, agreeing.

Closure is the writers choosing an endstate.  Not everyone wants the same endstate.  Ergo, someone is going to be disappointed whenever the writers choose an endstate.  Not so hard to follow, is it?

The idiom "you can't please everyone" and every derivative of it you are trying to mangle into this thread are not arguments for the inconsistencies, retcons, and plot devices used in DA2.
 

[nos_astra]

The only thing that has an actual impact in DAO was: Annul the Circle and you won't be able to ask the mages to save Connor. It's the only consequence I remember that mattered. The rest was flavour.

I feel I prefer defining who Hawke is on a smaller scale over being railroaded towards AWESOME regardless of my carefully crafted origin.

Modifié par klarabella, 18 avril 2011 - 05:16 .

[AkiKishi]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

What was retconned, aside from:

1) Anders, who may have died in DAA
2) Qunari horns
3) Sister Nightengale - who may also be dead

Seems like minor things when compared to DAA making my Warden who hates the Wardens remain a Warden.

addiction21 wrote...

Wow. Its like that poster that called Sylvius the Mad a BW fanboy.

That was hilarious.  

Yeah that's very minor.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 18 avril 2011 - 05:12 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Rockpopple wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Don't go there because I will tear DA2 apart on the same principles. DA2 choices had no more effect on the end battle than DAO ones. From Act 1, making money and finding idol has no more or less effect than finding the deeds to force allies to join battle against blight in DAO. Act 2, Arishok is no more or less different than stopping Logain. Act 3 has an end boss fight (in DA2) it's split between 2 bosses as opposed to one in (DAO) either title both have massive impact on the world, if you don't kill the archdemon the world would possibly be in ruins under the rampage of the blight, in DA2 the mages and templars run amok instead. 

Except I never claimed DA2's choices had more effect on the end battle than DA:O. Read my previous posts. I never stated that. I stated the other way around, that DA:O's choices had no more effect on the end battle than with DA2, and you just agreed with me. You're welcome.

Your bashing/criticising one to improve and better the other. DAO and DA2 are done in different ways if don't believe me then believe the devs, I have already quoted them few times stating that DA2 is different both in choices style and story type. If you have to bash the former to make the latter seem better it won't work because anything you put forward I can counter.

In fact one of my biggest issues with the arguments put forward to defend DA2 and compare to DAO is faux pas to begin with. For example people when defending the dialogue system it is exactly the same argument between DAO and ME that occured. The devs themselves answered this and agreed with me when I said the difference between DAO and ME and DAO and DA2 is a difference in 'role' you wished to play for me being I put myself in the world using CC, no VO and choices I would make in those situations as opposed to playing as someone else which is more prevalent in DA2. I got attacked non stop by idiots (claiming I am wrong and shameless).

Muzyka and Zeschuk say the difference in the two games' dialogue systems is one of perspective, literally. After fielding questions about Dragon Age's approach at GDC 2009 in San Francisco earlier this year, the two came to the conclusion that the reason Mass Effect's dialogue system doesn't work well with Dragon Age (they tried it) is because the latter is first-person and the former is third-person. Change perspectives, and the entire game changes with it.

In Mass Effect, a third-person game, you take a character and mold them into a new person, directing the character rather than fully inhabiting her or him. As you play, you're able to watch that directed person act in the game, speaking with the voice you have helped shape. But in Dragon Age, you don't watch the conversation because you are the conversation. After the success of Mass Effect, Muzyka and Zeschuk say they thought about applying the dialogue system to all their games but soon realized that different experiences call for different approaches.

"We talked about this for months, and we did all kinds of analysis," says Zeschuk. "Really we see it as a step sideways. It's actually about presenting different flavors of games."

In part, the flavor difference between Mass Effect and Dragon Age is one of artistic approach (among many other factors). The vision for Mass Effect was intensely cinematic, from the depth-of-field effect in conversations to the camera angles, music and dramatic effect of the on-screen actions of your character. In Mass Effect, you tell Shepard to do something, and then you watch him or her act.

"It's that little bit of surprise because you just don't feel like you're in complete control of it, whereas in Dragon Age, you are that character. That is you. You're doing it. Everything is you," says Zeschuk.

It's that subtle but distinct difference that makes Mass Effect's dialogue system a poor fit for Dragon Age: Origins, Muzyka and Zeschuk say, and it's a choice they think players will find natural when they finally get behind the controls. Additionally, the Dragon Age system, because it's not tied to a relatively small graphic with a maximum of five or six choices, can offer far more conversation possibilities than its third-person cousin.

"For those four to six choices you get, there are probably four to six times more you don't see that would be totally different depending on your origin choice, your choices up to that point in the game, whether you're male or female, and a variety of other things," says Muzyka. "It's about the role you're playing. Are you playing a set role, or are you playing a role you've defined yourself?"

In the end Mike came in and threw all that out. It makes them look like hypocrites.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 18 avril 2011 - 05:21 .

[upsettingshorts]

TJSolo wrote...

The idiom "you can't please everyone" and every derivative of it you are trying to mangle into this thread are not arguments for the inconsistencies, retcons, and plot devices used in DA2. 

It is for some of them. 

Are you also implying that all plot devices are inherently bad, or lazy?  I'm not reading into your comment so much as asking for clarification.

[upsettingshorts]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Yeah that's very minor

Well, to me it is.  Anders makes more sense than the possibility of the Sister Nightengale issue, however.  It is possible to handwave the Anders scenario in just the way he describes, given that battles are confused and epilogue cards are not treated as Word of God.  Sister Nightengale could have had her head chopped off.  That's less defensible.

And theyre all less bothersome to me than determining what my character does for me, such as in the examples I listed.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 18 avril 2011 - 05:16 .

[LadyJaneGrey]

addiction21 wrote...

cljqnsnyc wrote...


Unlike you, I have no problem allowing someone else their own opinions...and I don't need to use snark, insults, or arrogance to get my points across. 

You enjoy the rest of your day.

Wow. Its like that poster that called Sylvius the Mad a BW fanboy.

Sorry I missed that one...

[HTTP 404]

I call it Dragon Age puberty. Da3 will be much more filled out.

[TJSolo]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Are you also implying that all plot devices are inherently bad, or lazy?

No.

[AkiKishi]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Yeah that's very minor

Well, to me it is.  Anders makes more sense than the possibility of the Sister Nightengale issue, however.  It is possible to handwave the Anders scenario in just the way he describes, given that battles are confused and epilogue cards are not treated as Word of God.  Sister Nightengale could have had her head chopped off.  That's less defensible.

And theyre all less bothersome to me than determining what my character does for me, such as in the examples I listed.

The writers are picking and chosing a correct way to play the game. If there is only a correct way to play the game they should drop the pretence and make JRPGs.

DA2 is full of examples of the game having Hawke do stuff. Arrival pulled the same trick.

[upsettingshorts]

So then what you have specific issue with, therefore, are changes that cannot be explained through a but-thou-must (writers determining a "canon" of a sort within which to work), aren't well used plot device,s or aren't strictly cosmetic in nature?

Which are those? Again just to be clear, I'm not denying they exist, only asking what you're specifically referring to.

BobSmith101 wrote...

The writers are picking and chosing a correct way to play the game.

Similarly, I'm going to need examples if I'm going to respond coherently.  As it is a discussion we're trying to have, I imagine.

Are we talking about things like the Sister Petrice quest in Act 1?

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 18 avril 2011 - 05:22 .

[cljqnsnyc]

So now, DA2 is an intellectual property?

I must admit, I have heard some very interesting opinions about this game, but this one is by far the most intriguing. Many people see black or white, while other see gray. Whichever line you follow, in the end, the deciding factor for DA2's future approach will rest ultimately with sales, despite how any of us choose to interpret this game.

EA ONLY cares about one line, and that's the bottom line!

[upsettingshorts]

cljqnsnyc wrote...

So now, DA2 is an intellectual property?

Legally, yes.

In the sense that it can be approached thoughtfully - but doesn't have to be - also yes. 

Same is true of almost all the Bioware games I can think of.