353 réponses à ce sujet

[mesmerizedish]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

For a thread of this title, there is a disturbing lack of Edwin Starr.

OMZ, this is exactly what I was just thinking

[IanPolaris]

Filament wrote...
I mean, probably not, since that would be awfully derivative of ME-- but the point is, being a Seeker doesn't make it a given that you'll be pro-Chantry.

You are the Chantry's Inquistors/Gestapo, under the Chantry's direct control and in their chain of command.  Of course you have to be pro-Chantry.  You wouldn't BE a Seeker otherwise.  They'd never give you that authority otherwise.

-Polaris

[LobselVith8]

Filament wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Filament wrote...

I wouldn't just discount it out of hand.

Ian has good reason to discount it if it means more of a linear progression where our choices mean nothing and we're denied an opportunity to side with the mages or the templars.

You really should just own the argument if you're going to argue it. And those things aren't really a given just because the protagonist is a Seeker.

If Ian's point is about the difference between having a choice and having none at all, why shouldn't I address it?

[TEWR]

IanPolaris wrote...

Filament wrote...

From what I've heard there might be some sort of schism between the Templars and the Chantry, so if we were to be a Seeker in DA3, you wouldn't automatically be on the Templar's side... and if it's anything like being a Spectre you may not even be on the Chantry's side very much.

If you are with the Chantry, you are default against the mages.  Listen to Lelianna and Cassandra in DA2 if you doubt me for even a moment on this.

-Polaris

Ok hmm.... let's see...

"So is he...?"
"Gone. Just like the Warden."
"That can be no coincidence."
"So what now? Do we continue the search?"
"We leave it in the Maker's hands."

You're right Ian! It's so blatantly obvious they're siding against the mages!

[IanPolaris]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Uhm.. No. The ONLY thing that data said, was that most players opted to save the mages, instead of annulling the tower. In no way does that constitute an anti-chantry majority. All it shows is that a lot of people believed the tower could be saved.

Uhm. No.  The data was collected online by people playing the game and included every major and minor decision made.  That includes how the overwhelming majority of the people sided with the Mage's Collective (even though it was easier to betray them since the contract to betray them was in Denerim while you had to go across Fereldan to Redcliff to help them).  There was also the data of how many people lied to protect members of the Collective against the snoopy adventures and much, much more.  Pretty much the only pro-chantry thing people did was discover the ashes and let that be known.

-Polaris

[Jedi Master of Orion]

While I think it's unlikely that Bioware would or should pander to the Anti-Chantry crowd, being a Seeker seems like an overly restrictive choice for a Player Character.

[Herr Uhl]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

I'd say that the anti-chantry fanbase is just a very, very vocal minority.

LobselVith and and Ian are very vocal about it, but most people are against it.

Likewise, you're very vocally for the chantry. You calling people on it is like the pot calling the kettle black.

[IanPolaris]

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

While I think it's unlikely that Bioware would or should pander to the Anti-Chantry crowd, being a Seeker seems like an overly restrictive choice for a Player Character.

Indeed.  I don't want Bioware to pander to the anti-chantry crowd, but I think it would behoove them to realize (and deal with rather than insult/deny) that most are anti-chantry.

That means you give people a CHOICE as to what side they want to play:  Pro-Mage or Pro-Chantry (and perhaps even a third choice like Pro-Royalist/Secular).

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

Filament wrote...

And this is this different from the Council comparison you are so stubbornly ignoring, how?

Because you are comparing applies to kumquats that's why.  The Seekers are super-Templars who act as the Chantry's secret police.  They have their own ranks, own chain of command, and own TOE.  This is nothing like the Spectres in ME who are essentially hired mercs granted extraordinary legal powers by the Council and answer only to the council with no organization and no TOE beyond that.

Very different.

-Poalris

[EmperorSahlertz]

IanPolaris wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Uhm.. No. The ONLY thing that data said, was that most players opted to save the mages, instead of annulling the tower. In no way does that constitute an anti-chantry majority. All it shows is that a lot of people believed the tower could be saved.

Uhm. No.  The data was collected online by people playing the game and included every major and minor decision made.  That includes how the overwhelming majority of the people sided with the Mage's Collective (even though it was easier to betray them since the contract to betray them was in Denerim while you had to go across Fereldan to Redcliff to help them).  There was also the data of how many people lied to protect members of the Collective against the snoopy adventures and much, much more.  Pretty much the only pro-chantry thing people did was discover the ashes and let that be known.

-Polaris

I am more than sure that over 90% of everyone who ever did a quest for the collective did so for the xp and gold. Not becasue they wanted to support the cause. I know I did, though I did betray them on all the quests where it was allowed. But seriously. THose sidequests can't be used as reliable data, as a lot of people probably didn't even bother to read the quests.

[Torax]

Personally I dislike the Council cause they just use it as this sort of governing power that gets to control such a huge section of space. Hardly even accountable it seemed. Granted it is just written in this way like they live in peace. I'm not sure how true that is. They were distant and didn't care about the humans for sure besides the fact that the humans started to rival such older races in strength and numbers. In ME1 you are forced into being a Spectre. It's not even really a benefit besides getting to use an extra vendor. I wasn't overly impressed. In ME2 it's basically a conversation change here and there. GG...

[IanPolaris]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Ok hmm.... let's see...

"So is he...?"
"Gone. Just like the Warden."
"That can be no coincidence."
"So what now? Do we continue the search?"
"We leave it in the Maker's hands."

You're right Ian! It's so blatantly obvious they're siding against the mages!

Holy Selective quotes, Batman!

Let's start with Cassandra's open assertions throughout the interview with Varric that the Champion was an apostate/friend-of-apostate with the deliberate mission to bring down the chantry and spread heresy.  The fact she mentions magic in this first and foremost tells you right away Cassandra's own view on mages and magic, and it ain't good.

Likewise Lelianna when you meet her in DA2 is intensely anti-mage in start contrast to her pro-magic stance in DAO.

Varric has to convince her over many hours of intense interrogation that maybe, just maybe, the mages weren't competely to blame after all...and it's still clearly a hard sell for Cassandra.

-Polaris

[EmperorSahlertz]

Herr Uhl wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

I'd say that the anti-chantry fanbase is just a very, very vocal minority.

LobselVith and and Ian are very vocal about it, but most people are against it.

Likewise, you're very vocally for the chantry. You calling people on it is like the pot calling the kettle black.

I'm not particularly pro-chantry. I'm anti-anti-chantry though. Too many on this forum are branding the Chantry evil on baseless accusations. I also happens to aggree with the Chantry's view of magic. And since most discussions about the Chantry invovle the mage/chantry subject, so I join the fun, on the Chantry's side.

[hoorayforicecream]

Funny you should mention ME2. Statistics and metrics for games are an interesting beast. I, for one, preferred the ubiquitous femShep, but I am one of those rare ones.

[Torax]

Ian you do realize that there was like no pro chantry quests. The Order to you automatically means the Chantry. That is not the case in the end. The side quests just happen to have one that works for some apostates. Coincidence at best to say they are anti-chantry cause of it. The Urn is the only real Chantry quests besides Chantry Board quests which is like a bounty hunter selection from private citizens...

[EmperorSahlertz]

IanPolaris wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Ok hmm.... let's see...

"So is he...?"
"Gone. Just like the Warden."
"That can be no coincidence."
"So what now? Do we continue the search?"
"We leave it in the Maker's hands."

You're right Ian! It's so blatantly obvious they're siding against the mages!

Holy Selective quotes, Batman!

Let's start with Cassandra's open assertions throughout the interview with Varric that the Champion was an apostate/friend-of-apostate with the deliberate mission to bring down the chantry and spread heresy.  The fact she mentions magic in this first and foremost tells you right away Cassandra's own view on mages and magic, and it ain't good.

Likewise Lelianna when you meet her in DA2 is intensely anti-mage in start contrast to her pro-magic stance in DAO.

Varric has to convince her over many hours of intense interrogation that maybe, just maybe, the mages weren't competely to blame after all...and it's still clearly a hard sell for Cassandra.

-Polaris

Lelianna's so-called "anti-mage" view you get from the two sentences "we have tolerated them" and "Kirkwall can't be allowed to fall to magic", right?

[IanPolaris]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

I am more than sure that over 90% of everyone who ever did a quest for the collective did so for the xp and gold. Not becasue they wanted to support the cause. I know I did, though I did betray them on all the quests where it was allowed. But seriously. THose sidequests can't be used as reliable data, as a lot of people probably didn't even bother to read the quests.

I am sure they did do the quests for XP and gold, but you actually get more gold by Betraying the Collective and most people DON'T even when it's the easiest and most lucrative path.  Almost all the other decisions in the game break the same way.  Anti-Chantry.  The Urn of Sacred Ashes is the notable exception but it is a clear exception to the trend.

-Polaris

[mesmerizedish]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Funny you should mention ME2. Statistics and metrics for games are an interesting beast. I, for one, preferred the ubiquitous femShep, but I am one of those rare ones.

I like that more people played soldiers than every other class combined, because it makes me feel special that I've never played a soldier*.




*not to completion, anyway; I'm an infiltrator at heart; I'm actuall kinda getting a hankering to play ME again

[IanPolaris]

Torax wrote...

Ian you do realize that there was like no pro chantry quests. The Order to you automatically means the Chantry. That is not the case in the end. The side quests just happen to have one that works for some apostates. Coincidence at best to say they are anti-chantry cause of it. The Urn is the only real Chantry quests besides Chantry Board quests which is like a bounty hunter selection from private citizens...

In DAO when people are given the opportunity to side with the Chantry or not, they generally don't.  Bottom line.

-Polaris

[TEWR]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Uhm.. No. The ONLY thing that data said, was that most players opted to save the mages, instead of annulling the tower. In no way does that constitute an anti-chantry majority. All it shows is that a lot of people believed the tower could be saved.

Uhm. No.  The data was collected online by people playing the game and included every major and minor decision made.  That includes how the overwhelming majority of the people sided with the Mage's Collective (even though it was easier to betray them since the contract to betray them was in Denerim while you had to go across Fereldan to Redcliff to help them).  There was also the data of how many people lied to protect members of the Collective against the snoopy adventures and much, much more.  Pretty much the only pro-chantry thing people did was discover the ashes and let that be known.

-Polaris

I am more than sure that over 90% of everyone who ever did a quest for the collective did so for the xp and gold. Not becasue they wanted to support the cause. I know I did, though I did betray them on all the quests where it was allowed. But seriously. THose sidequests can't be used as reliable data, as a lot of people probably didn't even bother to read the quests.

I did the Collective's quests because I wanted to support them

And I wanted XP and gold too, I won't lie

[Maria Caliban]

Given that the Chantry is the largest and most powerful organization in Thedas, and that it's involved in numerous conflicts, I'd think making the protagonist a Seeker would give the player insight into matters we've yet to explore as well as a pleasant excuse for the thumbs-in-everyone's-pie approach BioWare PCs always take.

[IanPolaris]

Filament wrote...
Obviously it's not exactly the same. But all you have is a title, you have no idea what the circumstances are behind being a Seeker, you don't know how much they tolerate dissenting opinions (though you assume they don't) or an agent who handles things in ways they don't particularly like. You're writing off the idea before even hearing a thing about it.

We have more than a title.  We also have the codex entry on Seekers which tells us somthing about how they are supposed to work (and how they've been criminally negligent in Kirkwall...and I hope no one disagrees with that!)

I don't see how any Seeker as described by the Codex could be anything other than a pro-Chantry, stooge.  Sorry, but based on what I know so far, I don't see it.  I will give Bioware a (singular one) chance to change my mind on this, but I definately won't be pre-ording this time.....let's put it that way.

-Polaris

[Torax]

IanPolaris wrote...

Torax wrote...

Ian you do realize that there was like no pro chantry quests. The Order to you automatically means the Chantry. That is not the case in the end. The side quests just happen to have one that works for some apostates. Coincidence at best to say they are anti-chantry cause of it. The Urn is the only real Chantry quests besides Chantry Board quests which is like a bounty hunter selection from private citizens...

In DAO when people are given the opportunity to side with the Chantry or not, they generally don't.  Bottom line.

-Polaris

Where is all your data. Especially one that gives the REASONS for why people sided with things in games. You assume much. You see Templars and you scream Chantry. I for one talked to Alistair and learned that they are part of it but also given Lyrium that makes them dependent on them. You only see white or black so anything anti-mage is likely Pro-Chantry to you. The Urn is only Pro-Chantry cause it's a special case, the Ashes of Andraste. The mage collective was side quests for exp. There is a quest where you can turn in to a Templar in Denerim but I doubt most would consider it "I SIDE WITH THE CHANTRY AND HATE ALL MAGES!!!" I understand how your heart breaks at the plight of mages. But it's reaching to think everyone hates the Chantry and or thinks they are truly as Evil as you do. Heck I bet most of us get over games within a week. You have been basically whining about this for long enough don't you think?