59 réponses à ce sujet

[AngryFrozenWater]

Whatever I do in DA2 the main plot plays out the same, no matter what Mr Laidlaw and marketing promised. That article can beautify the game, but it doesn't change the fact that BW wasn't telling the truth. Instead of steering the main plot (like promised), Hawke was responding to what the story presented. The actual choices are cosmetic, and you'll fight the same bosses no matter what "decision" you have made.

It is worse than that: Whatever side you have chosen you still need to do the quests of the other side. That even disconnects me from the illusion of choice.

If the "impact of decisions" are a feature that is supposed to make re-playability more interesting than it failed, because at best you'll have some cosmetic dialogue changes and a brief "fork" that branches right back to the linear storyline.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 30 mai 2011 - 05:10 .

[Tommy6860]

Autolycus wrote...

You mean like this AFW?

Meredith - I need you to find 3 apostates.
Hawke - No i don't... (see...choice right there)....
Meredith - You will look for them...I know about you and your friends.
Hawke - So, like I give a crap what you know...I'm not doing it!....(more choice)...
Meredith - Fine, but you will find me a better ally than an enemy.
Hawke - Oh go stick your head in the oven you silly old bat...

*leaves room.....shrugs shoulders*...wtf happened?
*Goes to find the three apostates*

LMAO!!! This^ so much. That reminded of arguing with my mother on what we were going to have for dinner, I never won that match .

Modifié par Tommy6860, 30 mai 2011 - 05:19 .

[In Exile]

Brockololly wrote...
Taking the example of Morrigan and the OGB, its the same deal- if something like that gets relegated to a dinky codex entry or cameo....bleh. Depending on what the story is doing, I'm fine with not seeing content or seeing content based on choices I make in game- it gives me that much more incentive to play the game over again and make a different choice and experience new content.

I keep saying this, but the game can't ever do justice that this choice demands. Even if you set the game with the Warden as PC and with Morrigain as a returning NPC and set the plot to centre entirely around Flemeth. Because some significant portion of your player base would never have made this choice. And so everything has to be able to be done without the OGB.

And then there is the issue of cost, and designing an entire game around the last choice the player made (or never made).

[AngryFrozenWater]

Autolycus wrote...

You mean like this AFW?

Meredith - I need you to find 3 apostates.
Hawke - No i don't... (see...choice right there)....
Meredith - You will look for them...I know about you and your friends.
Hawke - So, like I give a crap what you know...I'm not doing it!....(more choice)...
Meredith - Fine, but you will find me a better ally than an enemy.
Hawke - Oh go stick your head in the oven you silly old bat...

*leaves room.....shrugs shoulders*...wtf happened?
*Goes to find the three apostates*

Exactly. It's irritating.

The final choice is something like that: I side with the templares and kill Orsino (makes sense) and then Meredith and if I side with the mages Orsino attacks for some reason (so I have to kill my ally) and then I kill Meredith. Duh.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 30 mai 2011 - 05:27 .

[AngryFrozenWater]

In Exile wrote...

Brockololly wrote...
Taking the example of Morrigan and the OGB, its the same deal- if something like that gets relegated to a dinky codex entry or cameo....bleh. Depending on what the story is doing, I'm fine with not seeing content or seeing content based on choices I make in game- it gives me that much more incentive to play the game over again and make a different choice and experience new content.

I keep saying this, but the game can't ever do justice that this choice demands. Even if you set the game with the Warden as PC and with Morrigain as a returning NPC and set the plot to centre entirely around Flemeth. Because some significant portion of your player base would never have made this choice. And so everything has to be able to be done without the OGB.

And then there is the issue of cost, and designing an entire game around the last choice the player made (or never made).

If that significant part of the player base makes that decision then that's the problem of that significant part of the player base. And if the game presents the OGB as being a very important decision in the game then I do want to see that reflected in DA2. It should have been mentioned. But no... Saving the werewolves was apparently more important, because that generated at least a 1 minute "quest".

Cost is not the issue. If BW promises that decisions matter than they have to face the consequences (how's that for a pun?). That's the real issue. They don't tell the truth. And frankly I don't care about cost. I am a gamer and not a stockholder.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 30 mai 2011 - 05:58 .

[Kaiser Shepard]

The honest truth is that the effects of choices in this genre are always glorified to some extent, depending on the level these choices are made. Origins has us make a lot of high level ones, but few of those amount to something more than "Choice A sets Flag B1, Flag B1 triggers Epilogue Text #12 (and/or Faceless Endgame Army B1)". DA2 may not live up to the promise of having a lot of world changing choices, but the (in comparison) lower level choices are at the very least almost all reflected in later conversations. Compared to Origins, where they went overboard with the final endgame decision in such a way that they couldn't live up to it in the expansequel (Ultimate Sacrifice), I'd say that's an inprovement.

The Mass Effect series has its greatest trump card - being imagined as a trilogy from the start - also being its greatest flaw: the way things are looking, assuming the best, many of our choices won't be reflected until the final battle of the last game of the series. Basically little more than just being another incarnation of Gondor Calls for Aid. Now, if a couple of the bigger choices from the first game already had noticeable consequences in the second one, things would've been balanced so much better. But alas, they decided to save everything for the end, which means they'll be condemned for it if they don't manage to pull it all off well in one go. 

Alpha Protocol is the only instance I know of in which nearly every choice, both world changing and personal, is represented in such a way within the game itself that I'd almost say that Obsidian's way is the way to do it. Almost, because I realize that having to acknowledge every little choice in a meaningful way is a highly inefficent way of developing videogames. Sadly enough, AP happens to be the only one of these that (as far as Sega is concerned) doesn't get past the first game...

Modifié par Kaiser Shepard, 30 mai 2011 - 06:11 .

[Plaintiff]

TJPags wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

TJPags wrote...

We know nothing in DA2 when the credits roll. We knew when the game STARTED that the Circles were in revolt and that Hawke was missing. So what Varric told Cassandra at the end is exactly what we knew in the beginning.

Choices we make in DA2 don't matter in DA2. Maybe the choices will matter in DA3, but in a meaningful way? I doubt it. Just look at the whole OGB situation from DAO - do you really think they're going to make two entirely different games, one for people who did the DR, and one for those who didn't? Nope.

There may be a cameo (as with people like Zev) or there may be a random encounter (as with the Harrowmounts being hunted) or there may be a gossip mention (as with pigeons dying in Ferelden) but something meaningful? I doubt it.

It's the problem with making a player choice so significant. But you know what? I'd still rather have player choice be significant.

And telling me I have choice, but that I have to use my imagination to know what the result is, that's terrible. And saying I have to go buy the next game to find out how what I did mattered is even worse.

I' confident that wetehr or not you did Morrigan's ritual is going to have a major impact on the storyline down the road. BioWare seems fully intend on letting choices have large scale long term consequences.

::Spoilers from Mass Effect::
For instances if you let the Rachni Queen live on Noveria. The Rachni will aid you in Mass Effect 3, but you have also given the Reapers a powerful race for them to indoctrinate. All of it depends on wether or not you made a single choice, in the first game, where you didn't know a lot of what was going on.

So yes, I'm confident that BioWare fully intends for us to feel major impacts, based on seemingly small choices.

Right, okay, that's wonderful.  Never played ME or ME2.

No matter, as I said before - giving me choices that don't matter in the game I'm playing is beyond terrible.  Telling me I have to go buy the next game to see the results of the game I just played?  That's like selling me a novel, one chapter at a time, only making me pay full price for each.

Or it's like a full novel in a series, because you know plenty of them do that.

Dragon Age is a series. It's not reasonable to expect them to resolve everything in the second installment.

And in any case, you do get differing results from decisions you make. Booting Keran from the templars gets you a different letter from his sister, and unlocks a quest in Act 2. If you took Torpor's deal, you see Feynriel as an abomination. Taking Dougal's offer in Act 1 results in him coming to your house in Act 2 to demand more money. And there's more that I haven't thought of off the top of my head.

I'm not seeing the problem here at all. You want consequences? You got them. The consequences are right there. You can see them. How significant do they have to be? The Qunari and the Mage/Templar conflict are major worldwide issues that are not and never were going to be resolved in a single isntallment, especially not the second one. There are plenty of issues left over from Origins and Awakening that were never resolved, the epilogue cards mostly only contain hints of what is to come and Gaider's confirmed that they're not necessarily canon anyway, so we are effectively in the dark about the consequences regarding decisions about the Anvil of the Void, the dwarven king, the Architect and more.

[_Aine_]

Interesting article and I agree to a point but.... I do mostly disagree.

Why?

There are many endings to Origins based on your race ( my elf could NEVER be queen for example ) or I could send Alistair off and recruit Loghain for another. I could live or die. There were *consequences* rather than mere choices in DA:O to both who you were and who you chose.

The glaring fault in DA2 ( to me, this is my opinion ) was that it had all the makings and work-up of a HUGE choice. Templars vs Mages. It simply never transpired. You always fought both regardless. The ending, while it had differences, had nothing to do (for you) with the main conflict. Human beings like drama but they also like conflict resolution, whether by diplomacy or death.

Had there been alternate endings that used the main conflict of the game's story, it may have been viewed more as a replayable event.

Part of me also believes that people tend to like video games for their sense of "heroism" and that despite an entire story being a downer, or mind ^&^% of sorts, the ending has to provide some satisfaction and feeling of doing something epic that you can't do in RL so easily. Otherwise you get a game where you may say " That was really, really emotional and done well" and someone asks " So, will you play it again?" and the easy answer is "no." There has to be *some* emotionally payoff or you will move on to something else that can give you a newness fix.

*shrug* Just my thoughts today.

In short: It isn't that there isn't choice and that there isn't consequence necessarily, it is that the BIGGEST and more glaring conflict and choice results in NOT having a choice and fighting both sides. My opinion.

That said, better epilogue would have been beyond nice. I missed that.

Modifié par shantisands, 30 mai 2011 - 01:18 .

[Darker_than_black]

This article has many good points...except that I don't really see the point of it.

To clarify; I agree that choices hardly matter more in DAO than in DA2 but how many people have stated otherwise?

“My choices didn’t matter at all in Dragon Age 2.” “Origins has way more replayability than Dragon Age 2.”
Did a lot of people actually say things like this? I don't think I have ever heard someone say that on these forums. Before DA2 came we had a lot of post about how the choices in DAO did not matter and all the Witcher fanboys descended upon it with their hate, comparisons and complaints. I got the impression that the majority of this forum agreed that choices in DAO had little to no impact on how the story played out and many hoped that we would see consequences of them in the sequel (yay...)

One thing that many people have been saying is that they want a similar epilouge for DA2 that we had in DAO. That is not the same as saying DAO had better choices & consequences.

Modifié par Darker_than_black, 30 mai 2011 - 01:53 .

[TJPags]

Plaintiff wrote...

TJPags wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

TJPags wrote...

We know nothing in DA2 when the credits roll. We knew when the game STARTED that the Circles were in revolt and that Hawke was missing. So what Varric told Cassandra at the end is exactly what we knew in the beginning.

Choices we make in DA2 don't matter in DA2. Maybe the choices will matter in DA3, but in a meaningful way? I doubt it. Just look at the whole OGB situation from DAO - do you really think they're going to make two entirely different games, one for people who did the DR, and one for those who didn't? Nope.

There may be a cameo (as with people like Zev) or there may be a random encounter (as with the Harrowmounts being hunted) or there may be a gossip mention (as with pigeons dying in Ferelden) but something meaningful? I doubt it.

It's the problem with making a player choice so significant. But you know what? I'd still rather have player choice be significant.

And telling me I have choice, but that I have to use my imagination to know what the result is, that's terrible. And saying I have to go buy the next game to find out how what I did mattered is even worse.

I' confident that wetehr or not you did Morrigan's ritual is going to have a major impact on the storyline down the road. BioWare seems fully intend on letting choices have large scale long term consequences.

::Spoilers from Mass Effect::
For instances if you let the Rachni Queen live on Noveria. The Rachni will aid you in Mass Effect 3, but you have also given the Reapers a powerful race for them to indoctrinate. All of it depends on wether or not you made a single choice, in the first game, where you didn't know a lot of what was going on.

So yes, I'm confident that BioWare fully intends for us to feel major impacts, based on seemingly small choices.

Right, okay, that's wonderful.  Never played ME or ME2.

No matter, as I said before - giving me choices that don't matter in the game I'm playing is beyond terrible.  Telling me I have to go buy the next game to see the results of the game I just played?  That's like selling me a novel, one chapter at a time, only making me pay full price for each.

Or it's like a full novel in a series, because you know plenty of them do that.

Dragon Age is a series. It's not reasonable to expect them to resolve everything in the second installment.

And in any case, you do get differing results from decisions you make. Booting Keran from the templars gets you a different letter from his sister, and unlocks a quest in Act 2. If you took Torpor's deal, you see Feynriel as an abomination. Taking Dougal's offer in Act 1 results in him coming to your house in Act 2 to demand more money. And there's more that I haven't thought of off the top of my head.

I'm not seeing the problem here at all. You want consequences? You got them. The consequences are right there. You can see them. How significant do they have to be? The Qunari and the Mage/Templar conflict are major worldwide issues that are not and never were going to be resolved in a single isntallment, especially not the second one. There are plenty of issues left over from Origins and Awakening that were never resolved, the epilogue cards mostly only contain hints of what is to come and Gaider's confirmed that they're not necessarily canon anyway, so we are effectively in the dark about the consequences regarding decisions about the Anvil of the Void, the dwarven king, the Architect and more.

Well, so we're going to compare this to a book series?  Well, then I'll compare this to the middle book of a series, where nothing of significance occurs, and it's excuse because it's a "set up" book.  You know, it's setting us up for the thrilling finale, so all that occurs is a bunch of people moving into different places, so they're ready for book 3 (or whatever the end is).  And you know what?  That's not something that's acceptable to me either.

Choices get me a different letter?  Wow, sorry, that doesn't do it for me.  I still get a letter, right?  Nobody changes their attitude to me, do they?  Meredith still goes nuts, right?  Grace still kills Thrask, right?

Worldwide issues that aren't meant to be resolved in a single installment is NOT what we were told we were getting, as someone else (I think it was AFW) noted.  We were told we were going to "Rise to Power", and the "how" was up to us.  Did we Rise to Power?  Nope, not in my opinion - nothing we did gave us any power to change anything.  Did we have a choice how to do it?  Nope - see the above examples about looking for Apostates, and about fighting both Orsino and Meredith.

Hey, if people are happy with this game being a "set up game" for DA3, more power to them.  If people are happy with a different letter, great.  I'm not here to say you or anyone else shouldn't be happy with things like that.  It fell well short for me, and any attempt to excuse it, or sugarcoat it, just isn't going to work.

[YohkoOhno]

I'm going to be that guy though and say The Witcher 2 did it. The entire second act of the game is set in an entirely different area depending on a choice you make. So the only way to see the other big area would be to play the game again and make a different choice. Thats pretty awesome.

Except there's a flaw to this approach. Some people want to get as much content as they can from the game while making their choices. TW2 I think is flawed because switching things up denies some of the better quests IMO. I rather like the DA:O/Alpha Protocol method instead where you go to the same places, but things end up differently based on your choice. There are people out there who won't play the game more than once. If only, say, 25% of the player base do a second playthough, is it worth all the time and effort.

[TheAwesomologist]

No offense to the OP, but the article is no different than some forum rant, except this guy has a blog with pictures. (Warning: When I initially clicked on the link i was taken to a malware page, thank goodness I'm on a Mac)

The blogger is correct that both games don't have as many meaningful choices as we think they do. However DA:O simply does a better job of making us feel like these choices matter. I just finished a "worst DA 2 play through" and for the most part the game was barely any different except for the active choices I made to get rid of companions. You know what? I kinda sucked. DA2 is carried because of its fairly well written companion characters. They have far more entertaining stories that are only influenced by the player's actions. We see them change, die, become better, become worse where as nothing really changes or maters in Kirkwall. The city is still a hellmouth of sorts and nothing you do really matters there. In fact I'd say Hawke's biggest effect on Kirkwall is making Aveline captain of the guard. I honestly think Meredith and the Templars could have handled the Arishok, Hawke just got there first.

From the Article:

As for replayability, Origins has a slight edge, but it’s not this massive gap that people make it out to be. You can choose a different Origin and get a different hour-long Origin story, but after that, aside from a few altered dialogues here and there depending on your class or your race, the only benefit to playing as a different race is that your in-game avatar looks different. Does the extra line or so of dialogue as a Human Noble talking to King Cailan or Arl Howe amongst thousands upon thousands of dialogue make the game that much more special? To me, hardly.

Now I will say this: DA 2 is re-playable if you're willing to have fun trying out new builds, different classes, and party combos.* You may discover new bits of banter but not much. Unlike DA:O however your new origin does change the game, more than the blogger is willing to admit. My first play through of DA:O was with a Female City Elf Rogue. I love that origin story. It's harsh, cruel, and payback is so freakin' sweet. Seeing Shiani at the end and helping save your old home was also a nice moment in the game. My Cousland play thru was even more memorable. Killing Howe takes on a whole different meaning. Where as in DA2 siding with the Templars just made me feel like I was playing a mentally challenged Hawke. Siding with the Mages was ruined by the fact that you still have to fight Orsino even though I single handedly OBLITERATED any Templar that came into the room (seriously they never made it into the wide part of the room). And no matter what you disappear! Just because!

*I'm not a huge fan of the overall story of DA 2. Being Champion means nothing, you never really "Rise to Power" and the ending is the same no matter what you do. Besides the absolutely awesome companions you pick up the core of the story is just dead weight fetch or grind quests all leading to the same point. However the game play was actually fun (on the PC so I had no Awesome button). Odd because going into the game I totally thought "Gee Bioware always does great stories, I just hope they don't mess up the game play by trying to appeal to the lowest common denominator." Turns out they did the opposite. Go figure.

[Sidney]

As someone said DAO makes you think you have choices. You can't say "f' it" I only need 2 allies not three and your choices in those 3 allies don't have a negative effect - siding the with werewolves doesn't mean no elven allies it means werewolf allies. The choices have no choice. The AD will die, DR or not. You always depose Loghain even if he's likely a better ruler than Allistar - see Claudius vs Hamlet's father for the same effect. DAO dresses those choices up nicely but in the end in most cRPG's choices are fairly limited in all actuality because the game is going somewhere and you are along for the ride.

[Sidney]

TheAwesomologist wrote...
Now I will say this: DA 2 is re-playable if you're willing to have fun trying out new builds, different classes, and party combos.* You may discover new bits of banter but not much. Unlike DA:O however your new origin does change the game, more than the blogger is willing to admit. My first play through of DA:O was with a Female City Elf Rogue. I love that origin story. It's harsh, cruel, and payback is so freakin' sweet.

That's really dramatic of you to say but in the end your orgins don't effect 99% of the game. They're filler and part of the illusion of choice in the game. They're good vignettes of story telling but elf/dwarf/human doesn't mean jack in the game.

[In Exile]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...
If that significant part of the player base makes that decision then that's the problem of that significant part of the player base. And if the game presents the OGB as being a very important decision in the game then I do want to see that reflected in DA2. It should have been mentioned. But no... Saving the werewolves was apparently more important, because that generated at least a 1 minute "quest".

I don't actually think OGB is as important a decision as people make it seem. I am just saying that if was as important as people thought then it would be impossible to do it justice without a forced cannon which would ****** of every person that didn't make that choice.

Cost is not the issue. If BW promises that decisions matter than they have to face the consequences (how's that for a pun?). That's the real issue. They don't tell the truth. And frankly I don't care about cost. I am a gamer and not a stockholder.

Cost is certainly the issue. Decisions matter is so vague a statement as to be utterly meaningless. What Bioware might mean is a reference in a future mage. What players think is loads of unique content and an elobrate plot sorrounding their choice. It's great that you don't care about the cost. But the developers have to, because they have to eat. 

Bioware certainly misled in the marketing for DA2. And there is no reason not to have lots of in-game choice and branching paths. But as a basic design element, sequels cannot have too much branching content. Otherwse they become impossible to make.

[cdtrk65]

In Exile wrote...


I keep saying this, but the game can't ever do justice that this choice demands. Even if you set the game with the Warden as PC and with Morrigain as a returning NPC and set the plot to centre entirely around Flemeth. Because some significant portion of your player base would never have made this choice. And so everything has to be able to be done without the OGB.

And then there is the issue of cost, and designing an entire game around the last choice the player made (or never made).

I think that is faulty. Most of us have more than one save file that can be used.

[TheAwesomologist]

Sidney wrote...

TheAwesomologist wrote...
Now I will say this: DA 2 is re-playable if you're willing to have fun trying out new builds, different classes, and party combos.* You may discover new bits of banter but not much. Unlike DA:O however your new origin does change the game, more than the blogger is willing to admit. My first play through of DA:O was with a Female City Elf Rogue. I love that origin story. It's harsh, cruel, and payback is so freakin' sweet.

That's really dramatic of you to say but in the end your orgins don't effect 99% of the game. They're filler and part of the illusion of choice in the game. They're good vignettes of story telling but elf/dwarf/human doesn't mean jack in the game.

The illusion of choice is a strong element to pursue for any video game that wants to offer an immersive experience. Thats what RPG's are supposed to provide. DA:O simply did a better job at it than DA2.

[tsunderes]

I found a lot of my choices had no consequences even though situations set it up as though they should (and large ones at that)
An example: During act of mercy, you're given the option to agree to kill Thrask to free the mages, NOTHING ever comes of this, not even an attempt. The game just railroads you.
Another example is killing that nobles son rather than arresting him, which you are told you will be in big trouble for but nothing ever happens.

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

Autolycus wrote...

You mean like this AFW?

Meredith - I need you to find 3 apostates.
Hawke - No i don't... (see...choice right there)....
Meredith - You will look for them...I know about you and your friends.
Hawke - So, like I give a crap what you know...I'm not doing it!....(more choice)...
Meredith - Fine, but you will find me a better ally than an enemy.
Hawke - Oh go stick your head in the oven you silly old bat...

*leaves room.....shrugs shoulders*...wtf happened?
*Goes to find the three apostates*

Oh yes, that >.<

THAT is what frustrated me: Getting a carrot dangled in front of me all the time. It wasn't an illusion of choice, it was "Here you go, a choice! Woops, just kidding! Aw, here you go, another choice...ha ha! Fooled you!"

-----------
Flemeth: Do you want my help?
Hawke: No. I don't trust you.
Flemeth: I just saved you from the darkspawn.
Hawke: And your curiosity as to who killed the ogre is satisfied! We'll take it from here. We don't need you.
Flemeth: But it so happens I need you. Take this amulet to Marethari and do what she tells you to do with it.
Hawke: No promises.
Flemeth: But you will do it.

*Hawke does it*

Carver: You sure showed her.
Hawke: Shut up.
Carver: At least you could have sold the amulet. We need the money for the expedition.
Hawke: If the amulet was an inventory item with a price tag attached, I WOULD HAVE.
-----------

Come on...if you're going to GIVE us choices multiple times in the same conversation, at least make us suffer the consequences of those choices! Have a cinematic that ends in Hawke and the others getting killed or have Flemeth deliver a really good threat that carries more weight than 'You'll do it', or why bother in the first place?

[Plaintiff]

TJPags wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

TJPags wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

TJPags wrote...

We know nothing in DA2 when the credits roll. We knew when the game STARTED that the Circles were in revolt and that Hawke was missing. So what Varric told Cassandra at the end is exactly what we knew in the beginning.

Choices we make in DA2 don't matter in DA2. Maybe the choices will matter in DA3, but in a meaningful way? I doubt it. Just look at the whole OGB situation from DAO - do you really think they're going to make two entirely different games, one for people who did the DR, and one for those who didn't? Nope.

There may be a cameo (as with people like Zev) or there may be a random encounter (as with the Harrowmounts being hunted) or there may be a gossip mention (as with pigeons dying in Ferelden) but something meaningful? I doubt it.

It's the problem with making a player choice so significant. But you know what? I'd still rather have player choice be significant.

And telling me I have choice, but that I have to use my imagination to know what the result is, that's terrible. And saying I have to go buy the next game to find out how what I did mattered is even worse.

I' confident that wetehr or not you did Morrigan's ritual is going to have a major impact on the storyline down the road. BioWare seems fully intend on letting choices have large scale long term consequences.

::Spoilers from Mass Effect::
For instances if you let the Rachni Queen live on Noveria. The Rachni will aid you in Mass Effect 3, but you have also given the Reapers a powerful race for them to indoctrinate. All of it depends on wether or not you made a single choice, in the first game, where you didn't know a lot of what was going on.

So yes, I'm confident that BioWare fully intends for us to feel major impacts, based on seemingly small choices.

Right, okay, that's wonderful.  Never played ME or ME2.

No matter, as I said before - giving me choices that don't matter in the game I'm playing is beyond terrible.  Telling me I have to go buy the next game to see the results of the game I just played?  That's like selling me a novel, one chapter at a time, only making me pay full price for each.

Or it's like a full novel in a series, because you know plenty of them do that.

Dragon Age is a series. It's not reasonable to expect them to resolve everything in the second installment.

And in any case, you do get differing results from decisions you make. Booting Keran from the templars gets you a different letter from his sister, and unlocks a quest in Act 2. If you took Torpor's deal, you see Feynriel as an abomination. Taking Dougal's offer in Act 1 results in him coming to your house in Act 2 to demand more money. And there's more that I haven't thought of off the top of my head.

I'm not seeing the problem here at all. You want consequences? You got them. The consequences are right there. You can see them. How significant do they have to be? The Qunari and the Mage/Templar conflict are major worldwide issues that are not and never were going to be resolved in a single isntallment, especially not the second one. There are plenty of issues left over from Origins and Awakening that were never resolved, the epilogue cards mostly only contain hints of what is to come and Gaider's confirmed that they're not necessarily canon anyway, so we are effectively in the dark about the consequences regarding decisions about the Anvil of the Void, the dwarven king, the Architect and more.

Well, so we're going to compare this to a book series?  Well, then I'll compare this to the middle book of a series, where nothing of significance occurs, and it's excuse because it's a "set up" book.  You know, it's setting us up for the thrilling finale, so all that occurs is a bunch of people moving into different places, so they're ready for book 3 (or whatever the end is).  And you know what?  That's not something that's acceptable to me either.

Choices get me a different letter?  Wow, sorry, that doesn't do it for me.  I still get a letter, right?  Nobody changes their attitude to me, do they?  Meredith still goes nuts, right?  Grace still kills Thrask, right?

Worldwide issues that aren't meant to be resolved in a single installment is NOT what we were told we were getting, as someone else (I think it was AFW) noted.  We were told we were going to "Rise to Power", and the "how" was up to us.  Did we Rise to Power?  Nope, not in my opinion - nothing we did gave us any power to change anything.  Did we have a choice how to do it?  Nope - see the above examples about looking for Apostates, and about fighting both Orsino and Meredith.

Hey, if people are happy with this game being a "set up game" for DA3, more power to them.  If people are happy with a different letter, great.  I'm not here to say you or anyone else shouldn't be happy with things like that.  It fell well short for me, and any attempt to excuse it, or sugarcoat it, just isn't going to work.

I mentioned one letter and the rest of my examples were new missions and cutscenes that arise based on earlier choices, which Origins has very little of. If you're not going to read my posts, I wonder that you take the time to reply at all.

Oh noes, you don't get to change major plot points. Just like in Origins. Just like every game ever. DA2 actually has less mandatory checkpoints than Origins and more options for resolving smaller quests than Origins had.

They shouldn't need to tell you that there will be unresolved plotlines that carry over to following installments, that's just the way most series work. Just because not every single question gets answered doesn't make it a "set-up" novel/game and it certainly doesn't mean that nothing of significance happens. In fact, plenty things of significance happened, you just deem them insignificant because you were forced to do them, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

I'm not excusing or sugarcoating anything, some of the statements people make about the Dragon Age series are just demonstrably wrong.

[tsunderes]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

Autolycus wrote...

You mean like this AFW?

Meredith - I need you to find 3 apostates.
Hawke - No i don't... (see...choice right there)....
Meredith - You will look for them...I know about you and your friends.
Hawke - So, like I give a crap what you know...I'm not doing it!....(more choice)...
Meredith - Fine, but you will find me a better ally than an enemy.
Hawke - Oh go stick your head in the oven you silly old bat...

*leaves room.....shrugs shoulders*...wtf happened?
*Goes to find the three apostates*

Oh yes, that >.<

THAT is what frustrated me: Getting a carrot dangled in front of me all the time. It wasn't an illusion of choice, it was "Here you go, a choice! Woops, just kidding! Aw, here you go, another choice...ha ha! Fooled you!"

-----------
Flemeth: Do you want my help?
Hawke: No. I don't trust you.
Flemeth: I just saved you from the darkspawn.
Hawke: And your curiosity as to who killed the ogre is satisfied! We'll take it from here. We don't need you.
Flemeth: But it so happens I need you. Take this amulet to Marethari and do what she tells you to do with it.
Hawke: No promises.
Flemeth: But you will do it.

*Hawke does it*

Carver: You sure showed her.
Hawke: Shut up.
Carver: At least you could have sold the amulet. We need the money for the expedition.
Hawke: If the amulet was an inventory item with a price tag attached, I WOULD HAVE.
-----------

Come on...if you're going to GIVE us choices multiple times in the same conversation, at least make us suffer the consequences of those choices! Have a cinematic that ends in Hawke and the others getting killed or have Flemeth deliver a really good threat that carries more weight than 'You'll do it', or why bother in the first place?

My thoughts exactly.

[In Exile]

cdtrk65 wrote...


I think that is faulty. Most of us have more than one save file that can be used.

You can have as many as you want. Doesn't change the problem that Bioware would need to offer 1 game for the cost of 2, development-wise.

[themonty72]

The Epilogue is in the Da2 strategy guide page 271. I dont know how many played this game without the book. But assume many. Its hints about Morrigan and child,the mirror, The reason why FLEMETH had you take that amulet in sundermont, The grey warden and hawk together in future events. I dont why they didnt put at the end of the game. All this stuff hints at DA3. I guess they rush the game and said hell we dont have time to put in the game so we will hide it in the book since many dont read strategy guides anyway.

Modifié par themonty72, 01 juin 2011 - 08:56 .