26 réponses à ce sujet

[Girl on a Rock]

There have been countless threads about the end of Act III: the ethics/morality of whom to side with, whether or not the Rite of Annulment was justified, the characterizations of Meredith and Orsino (and the problems with them), protests against the way the ending ultimately went down.

I think DA2 is flawed in a lot of ways, and I suspect the blame for this lies for the most part with EA. There are a lot of kernels of great, great story in this game, but most of them never come to fruition, or aren't sufficiently developed for the payoff to be really satisfying. I think this was a matter of time. I'm not sure how much Bioware had to do with setting up the timeframe for development, but what's clear from a narrative and development standpoint is that it simply wasn't enough.

That said, for me, there were moments of real emotional significance and pull in the game, particularly in Act III, which I think is kind of a mess in a lot of ways.

On my third playthrough, I played a self-interested, cunning mage who saw the conflicts in Kirkwall and felt no compulsion to choose sides. Rather, she exploited the weaknesses/desires of both for her own benefit, and cleand up nicely as a result. She managed to avoid making enemies (well, to the extent that Hawke can in this game, which I'll grant, isn't saying a lot), but still gave everybody lip and did what pleased her.

Part of my decision to have her side with the templars stemmed from a couple of factors. One, my Hawke did not truck with blood magic or demons, because she saw them both as pretty solid ways to lose the creature comforts she'd come to enjoy so much. Demons were just looking for someone to con, and she preferred to be the one doing the conning. Had she been living elsewhere, she might have been seduced by blood magic, but with the climate being what it was in Kirkwall, she decided against it. Also, despite her sense of self-interest, it was difficult to ignore the built-in connections to her family, and she did and does value them immensely. That her mother was killed by a blood mage/necromancer/maleficar and her brother became a templar was not lost on her, so she was able to come at it from a different perspective than other mages might have.

Watching the Chantry go up again after having played her in this mindset was almost as affecting as the first time I saw it happen - through the eyes of my rogue, who'd romanced/was living with Anders at the time. Whatever anyone's opinions on the justifiability of the act, one thing I can say for it was that was absolutely great storytelling. It was a shining moment in this game, and the subsequent dialogue with Anders, Sebastian, Orsino, Meredith, Carver, and Hawke was really riveting. Despite the mindset I'd set up for this Hawke, though, it still made me kind of ill to have her side with the templars - which I think still speaks to the potency of the narrative. While I think the story could have done a better job of selling the templars/balancing the sides, it's still something for me to be this affected, in whatever sense, by a video game.

The problem now, of course, is that I just want to stop playing. I've saved the game, and I don't want to go back. Because after all that, to go through the end battle, which I assume is going to be pretty similar to the two I've already been through (in which my Hawkes sided with the mages), is so untenably wack, I don't even want to deal with it. This had the potential to be a Big Deal. I know that they need an ending that will cohere with Whatever Comes Next, but the setup put them in a position where creating a one-size-fits-all ending is just completely anticlimactic, and makes all the great storytelling moments and moral struggle that happened throughout the rest of the game seem pretty futile. 

Again, none of this is new, and it's all been said before, and probably better, but I just needed to get it out, because I want to vom on this final battle I'm about to fight.

[Rifneno]

Hehe.  Good to know I wasn't the only one that couldn't really stomach the templar ending.  I tried to do it twice and I never got to the Gallows either time.  And to think, the mage siding with templars version has a scene where you can give Meredith the okay to execute a weeping Bethany.  Jesus.  I just can't even wrap my mind around that.

Once again I agree with you.  The fact that they needed to make all roads lead to Rome (hmm, that metaphor might be even more apt when you consider the Chantry) is what really handcuffed Act III.  I stick to the "DA2 was a massive prologue" analogy.

[Ollymandias]

The possibility of giving Meredith the okay to execute a weeping Bethany makes the Templar side okay for me.

Not because I want Bethany dead, but because I get the impression that Hawke can make a difference. Something which is a bit lacking in some parts of Act 3.

The ability to kill Bethany gives weight to the ability to save her. Just as the ability to give Fenris back to Danarius makes it meaningful to choose to instead defend him.

[Morroian]

Ollymandias wrote...

The possibility of giving Meredith the okay to execute a weeping Bethany makes the Templar side okay for me.

Not because I want Bethany dead, but because I get the impression that Hawke can make a difference. Something which is a bit lacking in some parts of Act 3.

The ability to kill Bethany gives weight to the ability to save her. Just as the ability to give Fenris back to Danarius makes it meaningful to choose to instead defend him.

I didn't realise that could happen to Bethany, in actual fact this does point to the fact that there are choices with consequences but as with the rest of the game they're all personal.

[Super_Fr33k]

If I were a cynical, Devil's Advocate kinda guy, I'd say, "Why complain about one, inevitable outcome? You're playing a framed narrative with an immortal witch who rants at you about destiny!"

Lawl. But in seriousness, Rifneno's description of DA2 as massive prologue is a good one. In one sense, the unavoidable, major events underscore how certain situations can be so dire, oppressive and unstable that one person cannot prevent violent, chaotic outcomes. Inevitability gives Hawke a humanizing powerlessness, despite his awesomeness.

In fairness, BW has stated that Hawke's story isn't done yet. I would hope this means that the nuances of a playthrough would play out in meaningful ways. I would hope a post-campaign expansion would allow Hawke to begin defining the contours of the mage rebellion, hopefully impacting how DA3 begins.

More bluntly, I seriously hope BW doesn't go the Awakening route and just go, "BAM! New setting, OC choices don't matter!" I want to see longer term consequences of various player actions in DA2.

[Foolsfolly]

I didn't realise that could happen to Bethany, in actual fact this does point to the fact that there are choices with consequences but as with the rest of the game they're all personal.

To be fair though, Bethany could be dead already anyway. So killing her in act 1 or 3 isn't as big of a deal as you'd think. Although it's more emotional and powerful in Act 3. The Deep Roads death is boring and poorly done, not sad.

[SkittlesKat96]

 Even though Dragon Age 2 had some big disappointments I agree that a lot of the decision making and choices were really personal and really make you have to think, I'm also a fan of the new art direction they are taking (it's consistent, although I didn't like the repetitively used areas, I don't think many people did)

[Girl on a Rock]

Rifneno wrote...

Hehe.  Good to know I wasn't the only one that couldn't really stomach the templar ending.  I tried to do it twice and I never got to the Gallows either time.  And to think, the mage siding with templars version has a scene where you can give Meredith the okay to execute a weeping Bethany.  Jesus.  I just can't even wrap my mind around that.

The whole way through, it felt kind of dirty. While because I was playing a mage, I didn't get the Bethany choice, there's still a moment where three mages throw themselves at your mercy, and I couldn't bring Hawke to execute them even under those circumstances, much less if it had been her sister. But then, she was a mage, so that shifts things somewhat.

Once again I agree with you.  The fact that they needed to make all roads lead to Rome (hmm, that metaphor might be even more apt when you consider the Chantry) is what really handcuffed Act III.  I stick to the "DA2 was a massive prologue" analogy.

That's a pretty good analogy! I like it a lot. But it definitely makes for a less enjoyable gaming experience...

[Girl on a Rock]

Morroian wrote...

Ollymandias wrote...

The possibility of giving Meredith the okay to execute a weeping Bethany makes the Templar side okay for me.

Not because I want Bethany dead, but because I get the impression that Hawke can make a difference. Something which is a bit lacking in some parts of Act 3.

The ability to kill Bethany gives weight to the ability to save her. Just as the ability to give Fenris back to Danarius makes it meaningful to choose to instead defend him.

I didn't realise that could happen to Bethany, in actual fact this does point to the fact that there are choices with consequences but as with the rest of the game they're all personal.

I think this is why the companion quests and relationships seem like they resonated most with many players.

[Girl on a Rock]

Foolsfolly wrote...

I didn't realise that could happen to Bethany, in actual fact this does point to the fact that there are choices with consequences but as with the rest of the game they're all personal.

To be fair though, Bethany could be dead already anyway. So killing her in act 1 or 3 isn't as big of a deal as you'd think. Although it's more emotional and powerful in Act 3. The Deep Roads death is boring and poorly done, not sad.

It's true, she could be, but she doesn't have to be. Bethany's life - if you don't play a mage - ends up in your hands, and the decisions you make do affect how and whether she lives. So that's something. But agreed, definitely, if you let Meredith kill her that's way more impactful than just having her randomly getting Tainted in the Deep Roads. Still, though, "randomly getting Taintined in the Deep Roads" makes way more sense to me than "Hawke kills his little sister as a part of a Rite of Annulment spurred by Meredith over an act committed by a mage who wasn't even in the Circle, despite his sister throwing herself on his mercy." 

I mean, sure, maybe Bethany, by that point, had given up and decided to become maleficar/an abomination, and was just crying and begging to trick Hawke into letting her go, as Meredith (I'm assuming, since she did about the non-Bethany mages in my mage playthrough) argues that she might be. However, if Hawke's going to assume that, when we have utterly no evidence to support that, then we can also assume that Hawke has gone full-Meredith and just thinks all mages should be killed, regardless.

I think it's good that there's the choice, so it's more meaningful in the sense that the player thinks he/she got to actually affect something, but I really can't think of a way that killing Bethany in Act III would make any sense.

[Girl on a Rock]

Super_Fr33k wrote...

If I were a cynical, Devil's Advocate kinda guy, I'd say, "Why complain about one, inevitable outcome? You're playing a framed narrative with an immortal witch who rants at you about destiny!"

Lulz! Good thing you're not, then...

Lawl. But in seriousness, Rifneno's description of DA2 as massive prologue is a good one. In one sense, the unavoidable, major events underscore how certain situations can be so dire, oppressive and unstable that one person cannot prevent violent, chaotic outcomes. Inevitability gives Hawke a humanizing powerlessness, despite his awesomeness.

This is true, but I would have appreciated it more had BW set things up so that the inevitability of the outcome seemed to come less out of left field. I realize it's a tricky business, getting your player, who probably wants free will in playing a video game, to end up at the point B that works for the next sequel, but hey, that's why we pay the big bucks, right? 

In fairness, BW has stated that Hawke's story isn't done yet. I would hope this means that the nuances of a playthrough would play out in meaningful ways. I would hope a post-campaign expansion would allow Hawke to begin defining the contours of the mage rebellion, hopefully impacting how DA3 begins.

More bluntly, I seriously hope BW doesn't go the Awakening route and just go, "BAM! New setting, OC choices don't matter!" I want to see longer term consequences of various player actions in DA2.

Haha, cheers to that! I think that BW could satisfy a lot of discontent with a thoughtful, well-wrought, huge expansion. Though I would request a few new maps, even if it's still within the greater Kirkwall metro area, because lawd, if I have to crawl through one of those four or five dungeon maps one more time... >.<

[Maria Caliban]

I picked Templar in my first, mage Hawke playthrough. I'll pick Mage in my current game but only because my sister is a mage.

While the Meredith and Orsino battles make more sense as if you side with the Templars, the story itself makes less sense because Hawke is completely superfluous in the scheme of things. Hawke helps murder a bunch of mages but Anders blowing up the Chantry gives other Circles inspiration to fight.

If you side with the Mages, Hawke being an important figure in Thedas and disappearing makes perfect sense.

[TheRealJayDee]

Foolsfolly wrote...

I didn't realise that could happen to Bethany, in actual fact this does point to the fact that there are choices with consequences but as with the rest of the game they're all personal.

To be fair though, Bethany could be dead already anyway. So killing her in act 1 or 3 isn't as big of a deal as you'd think. Although it's more emotional and powerful in Act 3. The Deep Roads death is boring and poorly done, not sad.

Happened on my first and meant to be canon playthrough. So weak. Just as all deaths in your family, sadly.

[EmperorSahlertz]

The big important moment in DA2 is not the fight, it is the choice. What happens after you choose your side, is just an action sequence with no real importance. It is the choice that matters, mage or templar. To expect something even more important to arise after that choice, would have been a misinterpretation of the game.

[Vicious]

The plot doesn't move from the first 5 minutes to 5 minutes from the end. 'The Chantry is on the brink of collapse' you can turn the game off right after the first time Varric speaks and still be ready for DA3.

[DanteCousland]

haha too true,

[Jesamyn]

My rogue Hawke was my second playthrough, and in my mind is my 'definitive' Hawke. It seemed like she was slotted somewhere between diplomatic and sarcastic. She was feisty and sassy, but respected for doing 'The Right Thing'. Ultimate expression of chaotic good, perhaps? She was lawful but only to a point - if doing what was 'right' in her book broke the law, well law be damned. We just made sure Aveline didn't know about those times. That being said, she was very wary of demons and had NO sympathy for blood mages, although she didn't automatically assume all apostates practiced blood magic

I felt like I was selling my Hawke's soul in siding with the Templars, up until it came to dealing with the surrendering mages. She didn't like the idea of the Right of Annulment, but thought it was better than subjecting civilians to an ongoing massive battle between mages and Templars that would potentially have huge casualties.  She also remembered a certain note in Quentin's quarters signed 'O' and never trusted him.  Bethany was a warden in my playthrough, so she was exempt from what was happening with the circle. However, that one scene with the begging mages was pretty pivotal in my playthrough, and I respected Cullen for speaking up and advising how the Right of Annulment was really mean to go down. I got so much satisfaction out of giving psycho-commander Meredith a big finger and informing her that we weren't doing it her way.

And the mages still thought I was teh awesome. And Anders was merely another psychotic footnote in history, like Meredith. All was well.

Modifié par Jesamyn, 18 avril 2011 - 07:22 .

[JabbaDaHutt30]

All I know is that the final battle had some horrible moments. When Meredith force jumped so high in the sky, higher than any jedi I've ever heard of, only to beam down with equal lightning-speed, crushing the pavement underneath, I literally went ( I swear to God, something similar if not *exactly* the same ): "OH FOR F***'S SAKE! REALLY?"

Pardon my language but really, BioWare? Sending Meredith flying, lyriumsabers, razor-spins? I'm sorry but this is just... what the f**** were you thinking?

I think those razor spins just did it for me. EVERYTHING up until that -- every combat animation -- was MODERATE in comparison.

Modifié par JabbaDaHutt30, 18 avril 2011 - 05:38 .

[Vicious]

Meredith's flying leaps were right out of JRPG territory, which is hilarious considering Bioware has spent a lot of time disparaging JRPGs.

I mean her conjuring a red super shield while you fought the statues would have been easier to swallow.

But nope. Flying super backflip.

Meredith's moves were the most pathetic moment in the game. It was then I realized that Bioware is out of control. Luckily Mass Effect is made by a different branch.

[JabbaDaHutt30]

Vicious wrote...

Meredith's flying leaps were right out of JRPG territory, which is hilarious considering Bioware has spent a lot of time disparaging JRPGs.

I mean her conjuring a red super shield while you fought the statues would have been easier to swallow.

But nope. Flying super backflip.

Meredith's moves were the most pathetic moment in the game. It was then I realized that Bioware is out of control. Luckily Mass Effect is made by a different branch.

Yeah, but really, it was NOTHING like any Mass Effect I've ever played. I haven't seen any human/alien abilities that I consider that extreme... or badly done.

And those spinning robotic blades.... I can't believe they did that. I won't try to make sense of how someone who dislikes magic so much can bring so many statues to life. That's pretty much more dangerous than any blood magic I've ever encountered in the game.

If I was feeling... artistic, I'd say that those slave facepalming statues represent fans lashing out in disgust at what BioWare did with the final boss fight. 

Modifié par JabbaDaHutt30, 18 avril 2011 - 05:58 .

[jds1bio]

JabbaDaHutt30 wrote...

If I was feeling... artistic, I'd say that those slave facepalming statues represent fans lashing out in disgust at what BioWare did with the final boss fight. 

I'll never look at the gallows the same way again!

[jds1bio]

OP: I totally understand your post. I've said some similar things, and more people are starting to post this type of response to the ending, now that they've played through the game more than once.

I've had to tell people who felt I was dinging the story and ending as being not valid enough for an RPG, that it's not the story I take issue with. The story itself is very good, and the game made me react and think about the situations it presents. And having the one-endgame-fits-all is fine for a story. But not for an RPG that stresses choice as much as DA2 does with its continuous pick-a-side resolutions and its choice-dialogue wheel mechanism.

[Rifneno]

SkittlesKat96 wrote...

I'm also a fan of the new art direction they are taking (it's consistent, although I didn't like the repetitively used areas, I don't think many people did)

Even the mutant looking elves?  Why is Orsino's nose the size of an ogre maul?  If he wanted true power for his blood magic, he shouldn't slit his wrists.  He should give himself a nosebleed.  My God, he'd be unstoppable!

Girl on a Rock wrote...

The whole way through, it felt kind of dirty. While because I was playing a mage, I didn't get the Bethany choice, there's still a moment where three mages throw themselves at your mercy, and I couldn't bring Hawke to execute them even under those circumstances, much less if it had been her sister. But then, she was a mage, so that shifts things somewhat.

Yeah, I have real trouble RPing a character that directly conflicts with my real ethics.  I can play a more ruthless type, like the renegade option in Bring Down the Sky, but I just can't do some of the simply evil options.  For instance letting the Tevinter blood mage in DAO sacrifice the elven would-be slaves to bolster the Warden's stats.  Well I can make myself take the option I guess, I just get absolutely no enjoyment out of a game playing evil.  The only ones I seriously "cannot" do are for instance weeping Bethany, or killing Connor in front of Isolde.  The latter one makes some degree of sense but tears melt me like butter.  =/

That's a pretty good analogy! I like it a lot. But it definitely makes for a less enjoyable gaming experience...

Thanks.  I certainly agree it makes for a less enjoyable game.  I didn't mean it as a defense of the game hehe...  DA2 is a very good game on its own merits, but it falls woefully short of the standard DAO set.

[Foolsfolly]

Even the mutant looking elves?

Hey, I like the new elf look. I always found the "elves are beautiful" thing boring. The new elves look like a different species from humanity and still look attractive.

I like the new look for this game. I hope they keep with it for the next.

[Girl on a Rock]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I picked Templar in my first, mage Hawke playthrough. I'll pick Mage in my current game but only because my sister is a mage.

While the Meredith and Orsino battles make more sense as if you side with the Templars, the story itself makes less sense because Hawke is completely superfluous in the scheme of things. Hawke helps murder a bunch of mages but Anders blowing up the Chantry gives other Circles inspiration to fight.

If you side with the Mages, Hawke being an important figure in Thedas and disappearing makes perfect sense.

That's an excellent point. I mean, I'm guessing they'll figure out some way to explain Hawke disappearing for those who choose siding with the Templars as their canon game, but honestly, it'll have to be pretty compelling, because at that point, it'll only make sense for Hawke to stick around and try to reinforce the status quo. According to the endgame, all the Circles in Thedas have risen up, so as you say, Hawke's efforts become irrelevant.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The big important moment in DA2 is not the fight, it is the choice. What happens after you choose your side, is just an action sequence with no real importance. It is the choice that matters, mage or templar. To expect something even more important to arise after that choice, would have been a misinterpretation of the game.

I think my problem with this is that the choice actually doesn't matter at all. What DA2 attempts to make the point of the story is the conflict between the templars and the mages. However, Hawke's actions throughout the game end up having little to no impact on this conflict, and it's resolved the same way no matter what choice Hawke makes in "The Last Straw." This fact renders the choice and the end battle irrelevant, because the outcome is the same no matter what (as opposed to in DA:O, where the player decided who would rule Ferelden, and who would live or die in the end - not to mention determining the fates of the Dalish, the Werewolves, and the succession of the throne of Orzammar). Maria Caliban brings up a good point in saying that siding with the templars becomes an exercise in futility, because despite Hawke's support, Anders' ambition to free all mages in Thedas from their respective circles comes to fruition. If Hawke sides with the mages, his/her role becomes more meaningful, since she assists in that first rebellion, but the impact of this is undercut somewhat by the fact that either way, you end up having to kill Orsino, and that apparently all the mages in Kirkwall besides Bethany (or Hawke, if Hawke's a mage and doesn't use blood magic) are either abominations or blood mages.

Vicious wrote...

The plot doesn't move from the first 5 minutes to 5 minutes from the end. 'The Chantry is on the brink of collapse' you can turn the game off right after the first time Varric speaks and still be ready for DA3.

Hahaha - word.

JabbaDaHutt30 wrote...

Vicious wrote...

Meredith's flying leaps were right out of JRPG territory, which is hilarious considering Bioware has spent a lot of time disparaging JRPGs.

I mean her conjuring a red super shield while you fought the statues would have been easier to swallow.

But nope. Flying super backflip.

Meredith's moves were the most pathetic moment in the game. It was then I realized that Bioware is out of control. Luckily Mass Effect is made by a different branch.

Yeah, but really, it was NOTHING like any Mass Effect I've ever played. I haven't seen any human/alien abilities that I consider that extreme... or badly done.

And those spinning robotic blades.... I can't believe they did that. I won't try to make sense of how someone who dislikes magic so much can bring so many statues to life. That's pretty much more dangerous than any blood magic I've ever encountered in the game.

If I was feeling... artistic, I'd say that those slave facepalming statues represent fans lashing out in disgust at what BioWare did with the final boss fight.

This whole back and forth had me laughing to myself when I read it...

jds1bio wrote...

OP: I totally understand your post. I've said some similar things, and more people are starting to post this type of response to the ending, now that they've played through the game more than once.

I've had to tell people who felt I was dinging the story and ending as being not valid enough for an RPG, that it's not the story I take issue with. The story itself is very good, and the game made me react and think about the situations it presents. And having the one-endgame-fits-all is fine for a story. But not for an RPG that stresses choice as much as DA2 does with its continuous pick-a-side resolutions and its choice-dialogue wheel mechanism.

Yes. This times one million. I don't know if there was a better way to execute things so that they could get the Dragon Age story to where they wanted it to be, but this way just undermined every amazing moment that they did accomplish in the game. It's frustrating, and it's a shame, because the story is really excellent.

Rifneno wrote...

SkittlesKat96 wrote...

I'm also a fan of the new art direction they are taking (it's consistent, although I didn't like the repetitively used areas, I don't think many people did)

Even the mutant looking elves? Why is Orsino's nose the size of an ogre maul? If he wanted true power for his blood magic, he shouldn't slit his wrists. He should give himself a nosebleed. My God, he'd be unstoppable!

I really liked the mutant-looking elves! I think they looked graceful and oddly alien and beautiful in an unfamiliar way. Granted, Fenris did kind of look like a Final Fantasy refugee, but I feel like that was just him. I loved the way they looked and spoke, and wanted to make one!

Yeah, I have real trouble RPing a character that directly conflicts with my real ethics. I can play a more ruthless type, like the renegade option in Bring Down the Sky, but I just can't do some of the simply evil options. For instance letting the Tevinter blood mage in DAO sacrifice the elven would-be slaves to bolster the Warden's stats. Well I can make myself take the option I guess, I just get absolutely no enjoyment out of a game playing evil. The only ones I seriously "cannot" do are for instance weeping Bethany, or killing Connor in front of Isolde. The latter one makes some degree of sense but tears melt me like butter. =/

Haha, Isolde's tiny tears could never have moved me - I couldn't stand her! But I still couldn't kill Connor, especially because it wasn't his fault. His mother's stupidity was the largest part of what almost did him in, and I couldn't see killing him (or even his stupid mother, since it would have hurt the Arl and Connor and Alistair) when a quick trip to the Circle, where they already owed me a favor, would have resolved it.

(THOUGH, can we maybe talk about why Connor's abomination problems were curable with lyrium or blood magic, but nobody else's are? Or is that another thread? That's probably another thread. But I bet you know why!)

But yes, I don't really derive a whole lot of pleasure from playing a straight evil character. Renegade, yes, ruthless, yes, but making the "evil" decisions just doesn't sit as well with me, so there's no reason to do it! I could never have killed Bethany. In my book, she was really one of the few genuinely kind and innocent characters in the game.

Thanks. I certainly agree it makes for a less enjoyable game. I didn't mean it as a defense of the game hehe... DA2 is a very good game on its own merits, but it falls woefully short of the standard DAO set.

Agreed, completely!