143 réponses à ce sujet

[erynnar]

JohnEpler wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

John Epler,

The problem is by this point it's crystal clear that you AREN'T allowed to change anything, and I do consider that a problem in DA2. If nothing you can do is going to be meaningful (and it's not and that becomes obvious by the start of Act III...and I won't go into further details because that would involve spoilers), then why stay when the situation is clealry spiraling out of control. Not much political influence in a ruined wasteland and it's pretty clear at the end that's where Kirkwall is heading unless you can change it, and the game makes it crystal clear that you CAN'T change it no matter what you do.

-Polaris

Before I continue, I want to mention that I'm not trying to blindly defend or excuse anything. Once more, I understand this criticism and I understand why it's levelled. I don't agree with it completely, of course, but I'm not trying to bury my head in the sand and say 'it's okay guys here's why you're wrong'. With that in mind...

I think that this is a case of player knowledge versus character knowledge. Hawke doesn't know that he can't change things. Until the very end, there's still the glimmering of hope that, if he's able to take care of all the little problems, he can start to fix the big problems - the reasons why Kirkwall is the way it is. It's a powder keg, sure, but he can still hold out some hope that it's possible to dump a little water on it so it doesn't explode.

That's the point of a particular event near the end, really. Hawke's not the only one who thinks that the problems can be solved and the ship righted. There's at least one other character who believes it, and who takes steps specifically to prevent this sort of reconciliation. They don't want things returned to anything close to the status quo. They want to knock down the house of cards and scatter them to the winds so that it can never be rebuilt the way it was. And they take steps specifically to ensure that this happens.

Now, would we set it up so that an NPC provides the impetus for the climax again? I don't know - I'm not a writer, so while I do have some say in the narrative, it's at a more micro level, rather than macro. I know that we're aware that some people were not happy with this decision, and once again - I can certainly see why people have a problem with it. And, of course, if you're aware that the avalanche has started and there's not much you can do to stop it, it does create a rather different experience than if you are convinced throughout Act Three that you can still change the course of history.

I was a fan, to be honest, but then my tastes in fiction do tend to tend more towards the hopeless and dystopian than anything else. So perhaps I'm not the best judge - and fortunately for everyone, I'm also not going to be the guy who decides how to handle these aspects in the future

Pfft, you're awesome. I wouldn't mind if you were one of the ones who gets to decide. I guess my tastes don't run towards the hopeless and dystopian due to my job.

Maybe if I had a job with less hopelessness I might not take it as badly as I do. I understand moments of sadness, or despair in a game. Angst is fine, but it needs to be tempered with moments of funny and non angsty fun and love. DAO had moments of that. DA2 less so (though Aveline's get laid quest went a long way, and I still giggle over it).

I don't play a game to increase my sense of hopelessness, I get enough of that talking to cancer patients losing their houses or having their lights shut off, or throwing up their toenails. I don't need light and fluffy rainbows and kittens. And I don't need to save the world. But I do need the illusion of choice. I don't have that in real life...choice, or the illusion of with my job. Telling someone there's nothing I can do is a killer. I guess I despair when I can't lose myself in a game and at least feel like I'll make a difference, even if I don't.

Luckily for everyone else, BioWare isn't making games just for me.

Modifié par erynnar, 16 mai 2011 - 07:36 .

[Brockololly]

With respect to player agency and forced choice, like joining the Wardens or being stuck in Kirkwall, thats always going to happen in a narrative heavy game. I think the key is at least having the option to voice your displeasure with that. I think in Origins you can several times do just that with respect to not being thrilled about being a Warden and being reluctant about having to deal with the Blight as opposed to having your old life. But thats the thing with Origins- that it was a world ending thing you had to stop and the Wardens were the only ones able to deal with the Blight. So like it or not, you had a solid reason for doing what you had to do.

In DA2, with respect to wanting Hawke to get the hell out of Kirkwall and go back to Ferelden, you can voice that opinion several times, I think even to King Alistair and earlier. But the problem is, unlike the life or death Blight risking to swallow up the world, the narrative doesn't give any strong reason why once rich, Hawke couldn't have taken his/her mountains of gold and gone back to Ferelden to buy up all that Blighted Ferelden real estate and use his wealth to help his people that way.

I think thats part of the problem with the overall narrative not having much in the way of direction from the onset or input from the player, is that it ends up feeling like you're not an active participant in the story, but you're just passively along for the ride. The framed narrative time jumps just furthers that disconnect as you have little clue what Hawke was doing in those 3 year gaps which effectively makes him/her out to have been sitting on his butt, being even more passive.

Even if we had been able to donate some of Hawke's wealth to Ferelden refugees in Kirkwall and see how maybe as a result of that, they're able to go back and rebuild, that would be nice.

Even with the end game scenario, I don't have as much an issue that the particular event happens no matter what or that an NPC does it- I think its great that an NPC with strong views dramatically affects the world. But its that no matter what Hawke does leading up to that, the event plays out exactly the same. What would have been more interesting is if given how Hawke dealt with things, maybe you still end up with the end result of DA2 with the world in turmoil, but that precise event maybe doesn't happen but something else equally able to flip the world upside down happens.

That's the problem as I see it- as AngryFrozenWater said, DA2 was propped up as being BioWare's most reactive game to date and that the framed narrative would allow for a fair amount of divergence in the middle of the story, like having the epilogue slides as you went along. And that's just not at all the case, especially on a broader story level where everything plays out virtually the same no matter what.

Modifié par Brockololly, 16 mai 2011 - 07:36 .

[Zjarcal]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

The point is that you are only given the options that the story allow. Other people were stating why certain actions were not allowed. Simple it not the story the writer wanted to tell. So I am not given the option of siding with the darkspawn or the ArchDemon. I am not given the option of running away. I am not given the option of not becoming a Grey Warden.

Again you are missing the point. No one is saying that you are only given the option the story allows, but that is where illusion of choice is so important. In DAO you are given very real and valid reasons to WANT to stay within the boundaries set by the story, and honestly by the end of Act 2, DA2 doesn't. That's the difference.

-Polaris

To be honest, I disagree. A selfish character could just as well want to flee Ferelden and let someone else deal with the blight. Yes, you have a reason to want to stay, but that reason doesn't necessarily apply to everyone. And I would say that DA2 gives you the reason to want to stay to help in the Mage/Templar conflict, but again, that also doesn't apply to everyone.

How so?

Why should I explain it to you if you if you've already established how much you don't care about that? Maybe my Hawke cares because she wants to help Anders. Maybe my Hawke cares because she's feeling distressed about her mother's death and wants to help Meredith stop any future crimes like that one. Maybe my Hawke cares because she has come to love Kirkwall and wants to help see it a better place. Maybe my Hawke cares because her sister is in the Circle and she wants to make sure she is safe. Maybe.... I should stop, because you're gonna reply telling me how your Hawke doesn't care about any of that, and that's why I said:

"And I would say that DA2 gives you the reason to want to stay to help in the Mage/Templar conflict, but again, that also doesn't apply to everyone."

[TEWR]

Realmzmaster wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

and if you add in the fact that Gascard's testimony might be able to solidify help from the Templars because Emeric was right and this involved one of their Circle Mages, then there is no reason why Hawke, the City Guard, and the Templars didn't investigate fully.

Except Gascard is an apostate and blood mage who would believe him?

That's meta-gaming.  Emeric never knew he was a blood mage upon meeting him.

If he was able to stay hidden in Kirkwall for so long, then he could easily tell the Templars what he knows without disclosing his identity of being a mage.

edit: But Hawke definitely knew something was up with the house with all the shades, demons, notes and everything. But Chantry doctrine shouldn't interfere with something like this.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 16 mai 2011 - 07:59 .

[TEWR]

I'd also like to say that I hope people aren't suggesting Hawke move back to Lothering. Ferelden yes. Lothering no. the other survivors tried rebuilding there but found that the blighted lands made it impossible to live there, grow crops, etc.

EDIT: you know, it's hard to keep this discussion going without giving spoilers. Is there any way this thread could be moved to the spoilers section?

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 16 mai 2011 - 08:03 .

[TEWR]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I'd also like to say that I hope people aren't suggesting Hawke move back to Lothering. Ferelden yes. Lothering no. the other survivors tried rebuilding there but found that the blighted lands made it impossible to live there, grow crops, etc.

I woud've liked for her to move to Denerim.

Starkhaven might've been better if he needed to stay in the Free Marches. Granted my Hawkes want to stay in Kirkwall for various reasons, but Starkhaven would've been nice.

[erynnar]

Brockololly wrote...

With respect to player agency and forced choice, like joining the Wardens or being stuck in Kirkwall, thats always going to happen in a narrative heavy game. I think the key is at least having the option to voice your displeasure with that. I think in Origins you can several times do just that with respect to not being thrilled about being a Warden and being reluctant about having to deal with the Blight as opposed to having your old life. But thats the thing with Origins- that it was a world ending thing you had to stop and the Wardens were the only ones able to deal with the Blight. So like it or not, you had a solid reason for doing what you had to do.

In DA2, with respect to wanting Hawke to get the hell out of Kirkwall and go back to Ferelden, you can voice that opinion several times, I think even to King Alistair and earlier. But the problem is, unlike the life or death Blight risking to swallow up the world, the narrative doesn't give any strong reason why once rich, Hawke couldn't have taken his/her mountains of gold and gone back to Ferelden to buy up all that Blighted Ferelden real estate and use his wealth to help his people that way.

I think thats part of the problem with the overall narrative not having much in the way of direction from the onset or input from the player, is that it ends up feeling like you're not an active participant in the story, but you're just passively along for the ride. The framed narrative time jumps just furthers that disconnect as you have little clue what Hawke was doing in those 3 year gaps which effectively makes him/her out to have been sitting on his butt, being even more passive.

Even if we had been able to donate some of Hawke's wealth to Ferelden refugees in Kirkwall and see how maybe as a result of that, they're able to go back and rebuild, that would be nice.

Even with the end game scenario, I don't have as much an issue that the particular event happens no matter what or that an NPC does it- I think its great that an NPC with strong views dramatically affects the world. But its that no matter what Hawke does leading up to that, the event plays out exactly the same. What would have been more interesting is if given how Hawke dealt with things, maybe you still end up with the end result of DA2 with the world in turmoil, but that precise event maybe doesn't happen but something else equally able to flip the world upside down happens.

That's the problem as I see it- as AngryFrozenWater said, DA2 was propped up as being BioWare's most reactive game to date and that the framed narrative would allow for a fair amount of divergence in the middle of the story, like having the epilogue slides as you went along. And that's just not at all the case, especially on a broader story level where everything plays out virtually the same no matter what.

Oh very well said. And I do agree with it. I see John's point of view too. But Brock brought up a lot of very good points. And I don't having things set (kill the Archdemon for instance, that has to be the way stories and games are). But I do like the illusion of choice.

[Apollo Starflare]

Eh, I think a lot of the desire to return to Ferelden stems from people missing Ferelden themselves and pushing that onto Hawke. Which is fine, Hawke is your character afterall and maybe there should have been more dialogue for that, but for me I thought Kirkwall (despite some of it's failings) was still plenty more memorable than Lothering in DAO. I mean, c'mon. Why would Hawke want to go back to Lothering? It's still Blighted for a start, but beyond that it's a little backwater village that became a home only because of the family's need to hide. Their original farm no doubt got trashed too.

Go elsewhere in Ferelden? But why? Hawke has no more connection to those places than he does to Kirkwall. I have no connection to Bath just because I live in England, do I? In fact I would probably prefer to live in Cork in Ireland personally.

His estate and what remains of his friends and family are all based in Kirkwall, a city which is in trouble and trouble that Hawke by that point feels he (or she) can save it from. It's worth noting that once it becomes apparent that Hawke can't save Kirkwall he/she at some point decides to leave to pursue something elsewhere.

Denerim is just a less well off Kirkwall in many respects, and a place Hawke would have little or no support from high ups or friends.

[erynnar]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Alistairlover94 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I'd also like to say that I hope people aren't suggesting Hawke move back to Lothering. Ferelden yes. Lothering no. the other survivors tried rebuilding there but found that the blighted lands made it impossible to live there, grow crops, etc.

I woud've liked for her to move to Denerim.

Starkhaven might've been better if he needed to stay in the Free Marches. Granted my Hawkes want to stay in Kirkwall for various reasons, but Starkhaven would've been nice.

Which reminds me, why didn't we go to Starkhaven as an ambassador with Sebastian? That would've made sense, wouldn't it?

I agree with moving to Starkhaven (and no Eth, not Lothering...eep!).  And even visiting with Sebastian would be great.

[erynnar]

Apollo Starflare wrote...

Eh, I think a lot of the desire to return to Ferelden stems from people missing Ferelden themselves and pushing that onto Hawke. Which is fine, Hawke is your character afterall and maybe there should have been more dialogue for that, but for me I thought Kirkwall (despite some of it's failings) was still plenty more memorable than Lothering in DAO. I mean, c'mon. Why would Hawke want to go back to Lothering? It's still Blighted for a start, but beyond that it's a little backwater village that became a home only because of the family's need to hide. Their original farm no doubt got trashed too.

Go elsewhere in Ferelden? But why? Hawke has no more connection to those places than he does to Kirkwall. I have no connection to Bath just because I live in England, do I? In fact I would probably prefer to live in Cork in Ireland personally.

His estate and what remains of his friends and family are all based in Kirkwall, a city which is in trouble and trouble that Hawke by that point feels he (or she) can save it from. It's worth noting that once it becomes apparent that Hawke can't save Kirkwall he/she at some point decides to leave to pursue something elsewhere.

Denerim is just a less well off Kirkwall in many respects, and a place Hawke would have little or no support from high ups or friends.

Definitely not Lothering. I did say Ferelden, but anywhere would do. Starkhaven for instance. ROFL! Starkhaven she could have support by putting Sebastian on the throne. But how much support do you need if you have money? Support can be built, money talks.

[Abispa]

The problem with the game is NOT that they went to Kirkwall, since it's the perfect place to start a mage revolution against the Chantry, but that the game designers did such a mediocre job of making Kirkwall a fun place to explore after the first 10 minutes.

[Realmzmaster]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

and if you add in the fact that Gascard's testimony might be able to solidify help from the Templars because Emeric was right and this involved one of their Circle Mages, then there is no reason why Hawke, the City Guard, and the Templars didn't investigate fully.

Except Gascard is an apostate and blood mage who would believe him?

That's meta-gaming.  Emeric never knew he was a blood mage upon meeting him.

If he was able to stay hidden in Kirkwall for so long, then he could easily tell the Templars what he knows without disclosing his identity of being a mage.

edit: But Hawke definitely knew something was up with the house with all the shades, demons, notes and everything. But Chantry doctrine shouldn't interfere with something like this.

But Hawke was not alone. If you have  Aveline in your party she remarks that is not the reception my guards received when they enter the mansion. Now whether she reports that to the templars is up to her.. Which would cause suspecion to be cast on Gascard.. Obviously she does not report it because that is the way the story goes.

[TEWR]

Realmzmaster wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

and if you add in the fact that Gascard's testimony might be able to solidify help from the Templars because Emeric was right and this involved one of their Circle Mages, then there is no reason why Hawke, the City Guard, and the Templars didn't investigate fully.

Except Gascard is an apostate and blood mage who would believe him?

That's meta-gaming.  Emeric never knew he was a blood mage upon meeting him.

If he was able to stay hidden in Kirkwall for so long, then he could easily tell the Templars what he knows without disclosing his identity of being a mage.

edit: But Hawke definitely knew something was up with the house with all the shades, demons, notes and everything. But Chantry doctrine shouldn't interfere with something like this.

But Hawke was not alone. If you have  Aveline in your party she remarks that is not the reception my guards received when they enter the mansion. Now whether she reports that to the templars is up to her.. Which would cause suspecion to be cast on Gascard.. Obviously she does not report it because that is the way the story goes.

which places more fault on Hawke and Aveline than anything else. They have interrogated Gascard and if he was allowed to live knew things about the killer that no one else did.

edit: but this thread needs to be moved to the spoilers section because we are getting pretty spoilerific.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 16 mai 2011 - 09:11 .

[Zeevico]

Part of why I didn't like Kirkwall is that it didn't seem like a living city. Lothering was more alive than Kirkwall. It had gossips (recycled throughout the game, but I'll leave that be); quest givers with whom you could converse on matters non-quest related; and random people with whom you could, if you chose, just talk.

That's pretty damn fine. Don't see any random people to talk to in DA2. Don't see any at all. Which means that I have no reason to try a conversation with anyone--even with main characters who have something to say--because I don't expect them to say anything. I had to go on the forums to discover that the Arishok and Cullen actually talk to you outside of their allotted quest-giver experience. By that point I thought the only thing NPCs spewed out outside of a quest was a line of meaningless ambient dialogue.

And I didn't like that.

/gaider suck it up princess! /gaider. (Only kidding )

Modifié par Zeevico, 17 mai 2011 - 03:24 .

[Elhanan]

It was not until my second playthrough that I discovered deeper companion and family interactions occured by speaking to Dog. However, I wasn't upset; was elated!

[Realmzmaster]

Elhanan wrote...

It was not until my second playthrough that I discovered deeper companion and family interactions occured by speaking to Dog. However, I wasn't upset; was elated!

It was the same way in DAO. If you talked to dog in camp interesting events might occur.

[TEWR]

Dog is worthy of worship.


All praise Dog!!! Almighty Dog!!! We are not worthy of your presence!!!

[erynnar]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Dog is worthy of worship.


All praise Dog!!! Almighty Dog!!! We are not worthy of your presence!!!

And for those of us with dyslexia, it's dog not God. ROFL!  Really Dog and his convos in the hovel and later at the mansion were funny. And hurtfully insightful! Varric plays Diamond Back with Dog and Hawke never got invited!  *cries*

[neppakyo]

That's cause dog was more important to the story than hawke, erynnar. *evil whistle*