Aller au contenu

Photo

Videogames are not movies, get over it


291 réponses à ce sujet

#201
Skokes

Skokes
  • Members
  • 48 messages

JohnEpler wrote...

Foolsfolly wrote...

Closer to the topic at hand....

I think DA2 could have used more cinematic moments. I think whenever an achievement happens (slogging through a long dungeon, beating a boss, clearing an act, etc.) a cinematic can be a reward to the player.

The player beat this thing, did that task, whatever, and a small cutscene plays. Maybe a cutscene that pulls the camera back and we see something new.

I'll give an example. The opening escape from Lothering. Right before Flemeth shows up there was a chance for a cutscene as a reward. (Not saying it was a missed opportunity it's just a spoiler light area of discussion).

The player's fought their way here, killed an Ogre. Now the story says that there are Darkspawn closing in. The cutscene shows a small handful Hurlocks up close. Hardly anything really, but the characters are behaving as if they're surrounded and escape is impossible.

A cutscene showing the hill Hawke and company are on in the distance as Hurlocks charge towards it, their backs to us (a limited number is needed just to give the impression of larger sizes) would have fit the story and rewarded the player with a sight that should inspire dread or that "Oh, here we go!" attitude of being surrounded. A handful of close up shots didn't convey this as well.

There can also be cutscene rewards that offer vistas, like reaching the top of Sundermount and fighting the enemies there. Then you show a small cutscene of Hawke and company looking down Sundermount and onto Kirkwall in the distance. The camera rising to allow the player to take it all in. We can finally see the whole scale and scope of the city, and make out some of the landmarks.

A little thing like that would go a long way in opening the scope.

At least that's my two cents. Hope it makes sense.


You raise an interesting point. As I see it, there are two types of cinematics - 'reward' cinematics, where the player is rewarded with a neat scene for accomplishing a task (killing blows would fall under this heading, I think) and 'story' cinematics, which are cinematics which occur as a way to propel the story forward. I think, perhaps, DA2 suffered from a dearth of the former and perhaps an overabundance of the latter in some areas.

Ideally, the latter should be minimized wherever it takes agency away from the player. Sometimes, of course, it can be necessary to take away at least some agency, at least temporarily, but if you do it too often you run the risk of ending up with what feels like an interactive movie. Those latter should also be relatively short - a minute, two minutes of stuff happening that the player can't control and it can feel a bit like you're being shoved down a specific path and told 'here's what we wanted you to do, now go do it'.

That's not to say there aren't exceptions, of course - there are exceptions to every rule. However, the exceptions are stronger due to their status as exceptions - if it occurs too often, they become the norm and can damage the interactivity of the game experience.


SPOILERS below.

Similarly, I found the escape from the Qunari compound near the end similarly disjointed. Part of that has to do with the way combat plays - it's difficult to feel threatened when surrounded by a handful of enemies with advantageous positioning when every combat starts in much the same way. But I was left wondering why Hawke was fleeing. I had a similar feeling during the cinematic of the templars breaking into the Gallows. I was supporting the mages, and as the templars burst in and started putting mages to the sword, I was left wondering where Hawke was and why I wasn't being allowed to stop this. Watching it now on YouTube, I see that it takes place in the entrance to the Templar hall, but I'm not sure how well that's communicated (or rather how well communicated Hawke's location is in comparison, given it's somewhere the player's never been before), or whether it's said why there are mages hanging out there waiting to be slaughtered while Hawke, Orisno, and Co. are waiting further in.

Other than those, I can't say there were any other moments that I found the cinematics' usurpation of agency troubling. I will say that there were establishing shot type things in odd places - in Fools Rush In when Hawke enters the chantry and at the top of Act II, when Hawke enters the Viscount's Keep. Both were places I'd explored thoroughly, but Hawke and the camera gazed about like they'd never seen them before. Perhaps those establishing cinematics could be tied to Hawke's first time entering those areas? (Establishing shots upon first entering an area might go a long ways towards developing the setting and mood in general.)

#202
AkiKishi

AkiKishi
  • Members
  • 10 898 messages

Upsettingshorts wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

I'm not sure that is the case. A lot of people I know who play JRPGs don't like having to choose things from lists. They want the full cinematic experience delivered and them playing the "game" bits.
This is true for them even with a 3rd person game like Mass Effect. They love stories, they love characters and character building, but they have no need to choose how a character interacts with the world because it's more like the an actor in a film than an extension of themselves.


Even that kind of approach is more extreme than mine though it is somewhat related.  I'd describe what I do as something closer to a puppet master than one playing an avatar.  I'm picking the story I want the game to tell me, of which the protagonist is just the character over which I have the most control. 

So choosing how the character interacts with the world is still important.  But finite control over the protagonist isn't as important as say, the idea that the game react to and actively acknowledge that interaction - even if it's as simple as responding to the tone or intent of the decision.  Put another way, I don't want to have to imagine the impact, I want to see it and feel it - and that kind of calls for reducing the player agency by making such choices more explicit.

There's a continuum for this kind of thing, it's not two broadly identical camps that's for sure. 

Edit: Additional clarity/content


When I played the feeling I got was a director in a movie giving the actor direction.

The issue I think , and it's one John touched upon. By giving the character choice you can't be too expressive in a cinematic.

This is from FFXIII purposefully in Japanese because it makes it easier to look at the expressiveness of the animation and not get lost in the words.



Because the cinematic creator already has a set script they can focus on brining out the character. The price of course being that you are reduced to an observer, but there is no pretence otherwise.

#203
Sherbet Lemon

Sherbet Lemon
  • Members
  • 724 messages

Warheadz wrote...

Village Idiot wrote...
I don't want to derail the thread, but I will say one thing about this.  In my game, I'm pretty sure it was Knight-Captain Cullen who came to take Bethany to the Gallows.  Sure, a player could fight and win against him, but should a player be allowed to do that? Is it believable that there would be no repurcussions?  With the amount of power and influence the Templars had in this city, Hawke and his/her family would have had to flee again. 

In my opinion, it wouldn't make sense for Hawke to choose this as what would be the point in going into the Deep Roads then if the purpose is not to stay in Kirkwall and build a life?

At least in the game I played Hawke killed HUNDREDS of Templars without any repercussions. :huh:


But it's the Knight-Captain, not random Templar number 108.  He's second in command to Meredith, I believe.  It would not be inconceivable to think that he would have told the others where he was going.  If you kill Ser Karas (can't remember how spell his name), you get attacked later on in the game.  I don't think it would be illogical for Hawke to acquiesce to the Templars in this instance. 

***THERE BE SPOILERS***

But that is neither here nor there.  My point is essentially this:  players like me would make the case the narrative is as important as gameplay (if not slightly) more, I'm okay if my choices are shoehorned so that I can experience something that is more emotionally engaging.  If my Hawke could save Bethany everytime then she would.  The same goes for Leandra in "All That Remains" and your other sibling, be it Bethany or Carver in the beginning of the game.  When the choices are a bit more finite (lose Bethany to the Templars, death or Grey Wardens), the emotional impact, that sense of loss is still there. 

I didn't feel a loss of agency because creating the most emotionally engaging narrative is an important part of player agency in the first place (at least for me) which is why the cinematics work for me. Otherwise, my characters might have had experiences that weren't nearly as emotive as a character would who is forced into a completely opposite direction. I'm following Hawke through his/her journey.  I get to pick their general personality, and some of their choices, but their experience is my experience though my experience is not necessarily his/hers.  That's how I tended to look at both Dragon Age: Origins and Dragon Age 2.  

Oh goodness I hope that makes sense and I haven't just talked myself in circles. ^_^

Modifié par Village Idiot, 19 avril 2011 - 06:30 .


#204
AlexXIV

AlexXIV
  • Members
  • 10 670 messages
One thing that could help a bit to make scenes more lively are idle emotes. Not really a new idea but I have seen what that people made pretty good vids using emotes in MMORPGs for example. Nothing professional of course. But thinking that in a scene where Hawke talks to someone, Varric or someone else is picking something up from the ground or scratching himself or do whatever may detract a bit from 'unmovable portagonists'. I mean if anything is worse than one unanimated npc, it's two unanimated npcs next to each other. Or maybe it helps letting someone or something distract the eyes of the player for a bit. Like they do in newer animated cartoons that the protagonist is in the front and focus of the camera and in the background something happens. Could be funny too. Usually in the older animated pictures you someone may talk for half a minute and the only thing that moves are his mouth and eyes. I think the higher quality animations do mostly have alot of distracting things in it so the player or observer isn't so focused on the protagonist.

#205
AlanC9

AlanC9
  • Members
  • 35 744 messages
Isn't this thread getting a little spoilerrific for this board? I don't see a good way to address these questions without the spoilers, though.

#206
Warheadz

Warheadz
  • Members
  • 2 573 messages
@Village Idiot (too bothersome to start quoting so live with this! >:3 )

-No matter how great someone thinks the narrative is, it just makes me laugh how all templars preach about how mages are evil and they will catch all apostates at the same time when Hawke stands in front of them with his mage robes on, his staff on his back and with a flaming fireball in hand (which was left unused from the battle 3 ft away. It was a quick fight, Hawke killed everyone with Tempest).

- I personally, and many others I've heard, didn't give a **** about the family. They didn't feel like a family. You didn't have any history with them. They even felt really artificial right from the beginning when the game just throws 3 random characters at you and says: "Mother, brother, sister. Care about them!". And at a certain point you just know that they are going to start picking the family members off to create "great personal tragedy".

-And even if Cullen is second in command, whoopsie-****ing-doo. So let's say that you are playing a goody two shoes Hawke who would do anything for her sister. Why wouldn't he waste Cullen to save his sister?
1. He is really experienced in killing templars, killed a big lot of them
2. Used to living as an apostate
3. There is really nothing that prevents him from leaving Kirkwall
In general, the game makes a big fuss about the templar/mage situation, but the whole narrative just falls apart when the gameplay itself completely breaks EVERYTHING that the narrative establishes.

#207
Dr Bawbag

Dr Bawbag
  • Members
  • 210 messages
Probably one of the best story driven games I've played in recent years is Heavy Rain. It literally is an interactive movie that allows the player to make choices that can/do dramatically impact how events pan out.

Granted, like every other game out there, it does suffer from the occasional plot hole, but on the whole one of the most immersive games I've ever played.

#208
Dragoonlordz

Dragoonlordz
  • Members
  • 9 920 messages

AlanC9 wrote...

Isn't this thread getting a little spoilerrific for this board? I don't see a good way to address these questions without the spoilers, though.


Ditto, I can't really see how to talk about this without moving into a spoiler forum unless you only talk about camera angles and quality of textures etc.

#209
AkiKishi

AkiKishi
  • Members
  • 10 898 messages
Heres another case of cinematics taking over.

Hawke goes somewhere expecting a fight. The cinematic marches him into the most tatically disadvantagous position possible.

#210
John Epler

John Epler
  • BioWare Employees
  • 3 390 messages

BobSmith101 wrote...

Heres another case of cinematics taking over.

Hawke goes somewhere expecting a fight. The cinematic marches him into the most tatically disadvantagous position possible.


Did you have specific examples of this? I know we were cognizant of this being a huge complaint about DA:O, and we tried to address it wherever possible in DA2. There are a couple of instances I can think of where this might have happened (the skeletons in the cave in Act of Mercy being the one that stands out) but I didn't feel that we did this too often in DA2, particularly as compared to DA:O.

#211
Sherbet Lemon

Sherbet Lemon
  • Members
  • 724 messages
@Warheadz

Oh, I'm not bothered by the lack of quoting!  Whatever works!

I understand your point-of-view, really I do.  There are certain things in your statement I agree with and some I don't. 

Are there things about the game that trouble me?  Sure.  There are flaws in most things, and it ultimately depends upon what proves to be most effective for you as a player as to whether or not you can accept them.  I just wanted to offer a different perspective as to why Hawke might not want to fight for his/her sister in that instance. ^_^

#212
AlexXIV

AlexXIV
  • Members
  • 10 670 messages

JohnEpler wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Heres another case of cinematics taking over.

Hawke goes somewhere expecting a fight. The cinematic marches him into the most tatically disadvantagous position possible.


Did you have specific examples of this? I know we were cognizant of this being a huge complaint about DA:O, and we tried to address it wherever possible in DA2. There are a couple of instances I can think of where this might have happened (the skeletons in the cave in Act of Mercy being the one that stands out) but I didn't feel that we did this too often in DA2, particularly as compared to DA:O.

Well for example when you walk into the scene with petrice, her templar bodyguard and the qunari hostages. It is never possible to lauch a sneak attack or just 'listen in' any encounter because you always get caught in a cinematic that lets you march right in the middle of a mess. But that's probably also rather due to writing than cinematics as such.

Oh and this just reminds me. You only see one of the qunari getting their throats slit, but all of them die. That always kind of wondered me because naturally you want to save them, or any. Then you don't get a chance to stop the templar from slitting the qunari's throat. And you never see the others being killed either.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 19 avril 2011 - 07:10 .


#213
AkiKishi

AkiKishi
  • Members
  • 10 898 messages

JohnEpler wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Heres another case of cinematics taking over.

Hawke goes somewhere expecting a fight. The cinematic marches him into the most tatically disadvantagous position possible.


Did you have specific examples of this? I know we were cognizant of this being a huge complaint about DA:O, and we tried to address it wherever possible in DA2. There are a couple of instances I can think of where this might have happened (the skeletons in the cave in Act of Mercy being the one that stands out) but I didn't feel that we did this too often in DA2, particularly as compared to DA:O.


There is one while hunting the murderer you march right into the middle of the large room. It's even more illogical if you are an archer or mage.
Actually in DA it was not so bad tactically speaking because of the way the encounters were designed. But with the waves in DA2 it's much,much worse.

#214
Louis deGuerre

Louis deGuerre
  • Members
  • 640 messages
Another thing that fits into this category more or less.

You wanted the choices you made reflect in Hawke's autonomous responses. Interesting idea and might have worked but together with the simplified response system it works badly. This would only really have worked if you did it on a person-to-person basis. Now it just makes Hawke act psychotic.

Say I've been taking the 'red' option a few times which is the same as tough and jerk apparently.
Now Merril walks in, to whom I always was supernice.
And Hawke immediately starts calling her a **** out of the blue, because he has slipped into jerk mode.
It does not work and breaks immersion terrribly. Leave control of Hawke's behaviour as much in the hands of the player as possible or he'll feel even more disconnected.

#215
fchopin

fchopin
  • Members
  • 5 071 messages

AlexXIV wrote...

Well for example when you walk into the scene with petrice, her templar bodyguard and the qunari hostages. It is never possible to lauch a sneak attack or just 'listen in' any encounter because you always get caught in a cinematic that lets you march right in the middle of a mess. But that's probably also rather due to writing than cinematics as such.

Oh and this just reminds me. You only see one of the qunari getting their throats slit, but all of them die. That always kind of wondered me because naturally you want to save them, or any. Then you don't get a chance to stop the templar from slitting the qunari's throat. And you never see the others being killed either.



Also why couldn't Hawke save a few of the qunari prisoners, there was no option to do anything after the first qunari was killed. Hawke just stood there like a robot until they were all dead, similar to the Bethany incidence.
 
Most of the game was done so Hawke would never have any choices when something important was about to happen, it played out just like a movie.
 
The game for me was basically dead after Bethany left and Hawke just stood there with out an option to do something, i realised from then on that Hawke will be just a pawn without any influence, a dead character, or a character still standing but without any soul to influence anything.
 
The cinematics were done very well but there were done in such a way with the dialogue wheel to leave Hawke without any important influence in any part of the plot.
 
After the mother and sister developments there was nothing left for Hawke in Kirkwall.
 
The game should have finished at the end of act 2.

#216
Sylvius the Mad

Sylvius the Mad
  • Members
  • 24 112 messages

JohnEpler wrote...

Games are a primarily visual medium

I disagree.  Games are primarily a cerebral medium.  Gameplay takes place primarily in the player's mind - it's the desicion-making process that is the core of the gameplay.  This is a fundamental difference between games and movies: movies don't ask the viewer to make any decisions.

JohnEpler wrote...

Which is really what I was getting at. Films have been around for over a century, now. Instead of trying to reinvent the wheel when it comes to the parts of a game that are similar to what a film does, why not take a look at what they're doing through the lens of 'this is still a game and not a movie'?

Films do much of what they do because the people making them have discovered that certain visual techniques create and reinforce particular emotions/mindsets among the audience. Stuff like the rule of thirds, crossing the line, pushes and pulls, hitchcock zooms - those came about as a result of an understanding of the visual medium and how people process information presented to them in a particular way.

Again, games are not movies, and there are things that games can do that movies cannot, which is something that I strongly believe needs to be kept in mind. However, there is certainly crossover, and where that crossover occurs, why shouldn't we try and learn from the medium with the most experience?

I don't think there's nearly as much crossover as modern game-production would suggest.  Many of those cinematic techniques are based around an artistic use of the medium's primary limitation - the lens - and thus we see things like lens-flare and shallow focus.

But in games, those things are both wholly artificial and serve to act as a barrier between the player's perception and the game world in his which he is trying to play.  Your goal should be to eliminate those barriers, not create new ones.  Since RPG gameplay consists entirely of in-character decision-making, literally everything you do should consider to what extent it helps or hinders the player at staying in character.

JohnEpler wrote...

I've actually got a question for you guys - what scenes in DA2 did you feel took too much control away from you as a player?

Anything with a depth-of-field effect.  Whenever you're using those lens tricks to draw my attention to something, you're getting in the way of my roleplaying.  If I am my character's consciousness (and in a rpleplaying game, that's exactly what I am), then I need to be the one who decides what catches my character's attention.  If you rack focus in the middle of a scene where I'm already paying attention to something else, you've both prevented me from following my character's line-of-thought, and you've introduced a bunch of meta-game information into the scene my telling me what I'm supposed to find important.

Please stop doing that.

JohnEpler wrote...

You raise an interesting point. As I see it, there are two types of cinematics - 'reward' cinematics, where the player is rewarded with a neat scene for accomplishing a task (killing blows would fall under this heading, I think) and 'story' cinematics, which are cinematics which occur as a way to propel the story forward. I think, perhaps, DA2 suffered from a dearth of the former and perhaps an overabundance of the latter in some areas.

This is a terrific distinction.  In principle, I have no objection to "Reward Cinematics".

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 19 avril 2011 - 08:04 .


#217
Wulfram

Wulfram
  • Members
  • 18 950 messages

Skokes wrote...

Other than those, I can't say there were any other moments that I found the cinematics' usurpation of agency troubling. I will say that there were establishing shot type things in odd places - in Fools Rush In when Hawke enters the chantry and at the top of Act II, when Hawke enters the Viscount's Keep. Both were places I'd explored thoroughly, but Hawke and the camera gazed about like they'd never seen them before. Perhaps those establishing cinematics could be tied to Hawke's first time entering those areas? (Establishing shots upon first entering an area might go a long ways towards developing the setting and mood in general.)


My first thought with the Act 2 opening cutscene was "Hey, my new palace is pretty good", followed by "Hmm, this is bit over the top" and then "Damn, it's the Viscount's palace"

#218
Maria Caliban

Maria Caliban
  • Members
  • 26 094 messages

AlexXIV wrote...

Well for example when you walk into the scene with petrice, her templar bodyguard and the qunari hostages. It is never possible to lauch a sneak attack or just 'listen in' any encounter because you always get caught in a cinematic that lets you march right in the middle of a mess. But that's probably also rather due to writing than cinematics as such.


Amusingly, that's not what happened to me.

When I entered the map, I had Isabela lead so she could disarm any traps. At some point, I hit the hold button for the group.

I had her walk up to the crowd and stand right by Ser Varnell. He gave this long speech as I waited for something to happen. The cutscene apparently only triggers when the PC approaches.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 19 avril 2011 - 08:10 .


#219
Brockololly

Brockololly
  • Members
  • 9 032 messages
Another little annoyance regarding gameplay/cutscene discrepancies would be in the prologue when your sibling is killed- they get flung like a ragdoll and yet when the gameplay starts up, they 're in a different spot standing up and then they collapse. Just sort of looks goofy.


JohnEpler wrote...
You raise an interesting point. As I see it, there are two types of cinematics - 'reward' cinematics, where the player is rewarded with a neat scene for accomplishing a task (killing blows would fall under this heading, I think) and 'story' cinematics, which are cinematics which occur as a way to propel the story forward. I think, perhaps, DA2 suffered from a dearth of the former and perhaps an overabundance of the latter in some areas.


Really, what I'd like to see (and as has been mentioned already by adneate and AngryPants) is more of "cinematic" moments that can occur within the gameplay, or to lessen the gulf between whats happening in the cutscene version of the world and the gameplay world. So something like Origins and how it handled killing blows without resorting to a cutscene would be preferable to me as opposed to stopping all player input into combat and pulling all the way out into a fully done cutscene that takes you out of gameplay- like in the prologue when Hawke makes the killing blow on the Ogre.

I guess my preference would be to try and keep the in gameplay world or at least the transitions between the gameplay world and the cutscenes smoother. Especially the prologue, its terribly jarring as its combat-->cutscene-->combat--> cutscene and so on. It makes the whole experience feel very choppy.

I think somebody already brought up Half Life, but thats IMO a great example of doing "cutscenes" right. Obviously, that might be harder to do in something like DA (unless conversations adopt a true first person camera maybe), but I just think traditional cutscenes should be special affairs and not a dime a dozen, like they seemed in DA2, with just about every scene having the camera go up, down and all around and presenting a very different Hawke than the gameplay would have one think. Integrate as much as possible into the gameplay world and only use the traditional cutscenes for the truly Huge Moments in the story, so that those moments stand out even more- stuff like Flemeth swooping in was great, or even in Origins with, say, Zathrian lifting the Werewolf curse or killing the Archdemon. 

And of course, avoid using the crummy ultra low res compressed cutscenes like at the end in DA2 as those are just terrible regardless.:wizard:

Modifié par Brockololly, 19 avril 2011 - 08:15 .


#220
Blood-Lord Thanatos

Blood-Lord Thanatos
  • Members
  • 1 371 messages
Spoilers! Beware of Spoiler Kittens!


I thought that the conversations for mage hawke could have been done with little touches of hidden menace or barely contained power like when he intimidates other characters, or uses aggressive tones in the conversations with Petrice/Ser Cullen/Meredith, and maybe adding a cinematic for choosing a specialization that shows a difference in the perceptions of the other characters who interact with hawke.

:devil:

Modifié par Blood-Lord Thanatos, 19 avril 2011 - 08:26 .


#221
zeejay21

zeejay21
  • Members
  • 226 messages
And I always thought games are becoming like the movies.

And vice versa. :)

#222
Maria Caliban

Maria Caliban
  • Members
  • 26 094 messages

Brockololly wrote...

Really, what I'd like to see (and as has been mentioned already by adneate and AngryPants) is more of "cinematic" moments that can occur within the gameplay, or to lessen the gulf between whats happening in the cutscene version of the world and the gameplay world. So something like Origins and how it handled killing blows without resorting to a cutscene would be preferable to me as opposed to stopping all player input into combat and pulling all the way out into a fully done cutscene that takes you out of gameplay- like in the prologue when Hawke makes the killing blow on the Ogre.

The killing blows in Origins were terrible.

I don't mind losing control of my PC for a bit, but not in the middle of combat. I distinctly recall fighting darkspawn in Redcliffe. My warrior got a killing blow on an orge and while it the cool, slow-mo animation played, a group of darkspawn swarmed Leliana and managed to incapacitate her.

#223
TheJist

TheJist
  • Members
  • 177 messages

Maria Caliban wrote...

Brockololly wrote...

Really, what I'd like to see (and as has been mentioned already by adneate and AngryPants) is more of "cinematic" moments that can occur within the gameplay, or to lessen the gulf between whats happening in the cutscene version of the world and the gameplay world. So something like Origins and how it handled killing blows without resorting to a cutscene would be preferable to me as opposed to stopping all player input into combat and pulling all the way out into a fully done cutscene that takes you out of gameplay- like in the prologue when Hawke makes the killing blow on the Ogre.

The killing blows in Origins were terrible.

I don't mind losing control of my PC for a bit, but not in the middle of combat. I distinctly recall fighting darkspawn in Redcliffe. My warrior got a killing blow on an orge and while it the cool, slow-mo animation played, a group of darkspawn swarmed Leliana and managed to incapacitate her.


Worse possible excuse you lose control of that character not your entire team.

#224
erynnar

erynnar
  • Members
  • 3 010 messages

fchopin wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Well for example when you walk into the scene with petrice, her templar bodyguard and the qunari hostages. It is never possible to lauch a sneak attack or just 'listen in' any encounter because you always get caught in a cinematic that lets you march right in the middle of a mess. But that's probably also rather due to writing than cinematics as such.

Oh and this just reminds me. You only see one of the qunari getting their throats slit, but all of them die. That always kind of wondered me because naturally you want to save them, or any. Then you don't get a chance to stop the templar from slitting the qunari's throat. And you never see the others being killed either.



Also why couldn't Hawke save a few of the qunari prisoners, there was no option to do anything after the first qunari was killed. Hawke just stood there like a robot until they were all dead, similar to the Bethany incidence.
 
Most of the game was done so Hawke would never have any choices when something important was about to happen, it played out just like a movie.

This^ Too many important moments where my Hawke couldn't change the outcome at all (saving the Qunari who had not had their throats slit). I felt like DA2 was one big movie with small moments of me doing stuff that really just lead me to another scene and my actions made no difference.
 
The game for me was basically dead after Bethany left and Hawke just stood there with out an option to do something, i realised from then on that Hawke will be just a pawn without any influence, a dead character, or a character still standing but without any soul to influence anything.
 
The cinematics were done very well but there were done in such a way with the dialogue wheel to leave Hawke without any important influence in any part of the plot.
 
After the mother and sister developments there was nothing left for Hawke in Kirkwall.
 
The game should have finished at the end of act 2.



#225
Maria Caliban

Maria Caliban
  • Members
  • 26 094 messages
The Circle taking Bethany while Hawke does nothing, isn't the fault of cinematics but writing.

TheJist wrote...

Worse possible excuse you lose control of that character not your entire team.

It's okay for me to lose control of my tank because BioWare wants to show off it's killing blows because I can still control my other teammates? You're right, that is a horrible excuse.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 19 avril 2011 - 08:50 .