585 réponses à ce sujet

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

I think people are reading a little to much into the story of DA2, and no one is talking about how it is told, and it is told very poorly

[KnightofPhoenix]

txgoldrush wrote...
However, it is not the MAIN THEME, that is the difference. Does DAO have elements of the theme in it....yes. But is it about it? No.

It is the main theme in Origins. How do I know this? The game starts by saying the the blight is the result of human hubris. And you have several characters who kept talking about it throughout, both about the blight and the other issues.

You keep telling yourself that DA2 is about human nature escallating the conflict to its ridicuous climax, does not make it so, sorry. Most of those who loved DA2 concede that it was done poorly, that Meredith was a poorly developped character, and that Orsino was not even developped, and that the idol should have been changed or removed completely, because as it stands, it's crap.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 26 juin 2011 - 06:55 .

[txgoldrush]

DinoSteve wrote...

I think people are reading a little to much into the story of DA2, and no one is talking about how it is told, and it is told very poorly

and DAO was told pretty poorly...is just that most fans don't want to recognize this.

[txgoldrush]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...
However, it is not the MAIN THEME, that is the difference. Does DAO have elements of the theme in it....yes. But is it about it? No.

It is the main theme in Origins. How do I know this? The game starts by saying the the blight is the result of human hubris. And you have several characters who kept talking about it throughout, both about the blight and the other issues.

You keep telling yourself that DA2 is about human nature escallating the conflict to its ridicuous climax, does not make it so, sorry. Most of those who loved DA2 concede that it was done poorly, that Meredith was a poorly developped character, and that Orsino was not even developped, and that the idol should have been changed or removed compeltely.

But does it end that way...no. It ends on the theme of sacrifice. Thats where the main conflict is headed. Does it have that theme of the dark side of human nature escalating things in it? Yes. But the main plot and the conflict does not revolve around it. It does in DAII. The main theme comes from the conflict between the main protagonist and the main antagonist, whether it is a character or a concept.

How is Meredith poorly developed? Many people miss the chance to develop her...thats the flaw, not that she lacks development.

You are trying to say that DAII wasn't about anything at all, and that is not true.

[Theagg]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Theagg wrote...
As to Cullen ignoring the potential threat that has been presented to him in the form of Anders and not taking action. Yep, perhaps Cullen was stupid but that's no more different than real life cases where members of the authority have ignored the warnings of others about potentially dangerous individuals. Or ignored the intelligence data presented to them.

Not when he is supposed to be a zealous second in command of a specialized force designed to deal with mage threats. And not when Anders is right in front of him when the game laughibly pretends to give us the choice to turn him over, when the only thing that supposedely protected him from arrest was the Champion's friendship. They doin't even have to investigate, Anders is a mage outside the Circle, period, it's his duty to apprehend him, the Champion's friendship is irrelevent in that scenario.

That imo, is pushing stupidity to another level. And I don't mind stupidity being shown, but when almost no character in DA2 is shown as competent? That for me is a problem.

Maybe but my point still stands. Events as stupid as that have happened in real life when those whose job it is to surveil and detain those who are a threat to the state, or the community, have glaringly failed in their job to stop the person under suspicion. (Members of MI5, The Police and so on)

They may not have been in the same room with the suspect but they certainly knew who they were, "saw" them regularily, listened to them and were aware they were the type of person likely to commit terrorist atrocties. They probably knew them better than Cullen and co knew Anders.

Here in the UK, MI5, our security service were fully aware of Mohammed Siddique Kahn, the July 7th bomb attack ring leader and one other of the bombers for well over a year before they instigated the attack..but decided not to pursue them. Excuses were given as to why but the point remains.

So, I can still imagine Cullen and his 'security team' might make just such a mistake because of his ties with the Champion. Or for other reasons. Cullen always struck me as slightly dreamy anyway.

[KnightofPhoenix]

txgoldrush wrote...
But does it end that way...no. It ends on the theme of sacrifice. Thats where the main conflict is headed. Does it have that theme of the dark side of human nature escalating things in it? Yes. But the main plot and the conflict does not revolve around it. It does in DAII. The main theme comes from the conflict between the main protagonist and the main antagonist, whether it is a character or a concept.

The main conflict with Loghain is all about human nature. And the fight against the Archdemon also becomes part of human nature, as the willingness to sacrifice one's life or not, is a part of it. Especially when Morrigan gives you a way out. So your "human nature" is tested with that choice. It's the Warden struggling against his own nature.

If you want to, so very poorly, argue that DA2 is about Hawke against human nature, I'll say the same about the Warden and that the end is about him fighting his own nature.

And I'll even add something more. Being a warden in and of itself makes you barely human. Morrigan and others talk about it. That you essentially become halfdarkspawn and slowly descend to madness throughout your life. So Origins is about confronting that reality as well.

How is Meredith poorly developed? Many people miss the chance to develop her...thats the flaw, not that she lacks development.

You are trying to say that DAII wasn't about anything at all, and that is not true.

A character exposition in the last 10 minutes of the game is not development. It's character exposition (a very desperate and poor one). Character development is an on-going process that should be seen, and not just told, throughout the game. Especially when the hag's face shows up when the game starts.
Saren was developped. Loghain was developped. Meredith was not.

DA2, as it stands, is barely about anything all. It may have wanted to be about a rise to power that never happens, or about human nature that gets eclysped by all the inhuman elements. But that's not what we got.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 26 juin 2011 - 07:09 .

[Melca36]

txgoldrush wrote...


How is Meredith poorly developed? Many people miss the chance to develop her...thats the flaw, not that she lacks development.

You are trying to say that DAII wasn't about anything at all, and that is not true.

David Gaider in a recent interview has even said there WAS NOT enough Orsino and Meredith at the end!

Too much was cut from ACT 3 and that is WHY IT MADE LITTLE SENSE AT THE END!!!

[KnightofPhoenix]

Theagg wrote...
So, I can still imagine Cullen and his 'security team' might make just such a mistake because of his ties with the Champion. Or for other reasons. Cullen always struck me as slightly dreamy anyway.

When the Champion renouncing thsoe ties and when Anders is right in front of him in the middle of the most militarized Circle in Thedas, no. That for me, is crappy sloppy writing and an insult to our intelligence. They would have been better off not giving us that laughable excuse of a choice.

And like I said. I don't mind stupidity. In DA2, there is way too much of it and / or madness. Such things do not interest me. There are better ways to write a slippery slope and a situation spiralling out of control, while still making a lot of people competent and reasonable. In fact that makes it more tragic. In DA2, it's just laughable and it would have been an epic funny satire.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 26 juin 2011 - 07:10 .

[Theagg]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Theagg wrote...
As to Cullen ignoring the potential threat that has been presented to him in the form of Anders and not taking action. Yep, perhaps Cullen was stupid but that's no more different than real life cases where members of the authority have ignored the warnings of others about potentially dangerous individuals. Or ignored the intelligence data presented to them.

Not when he is supposed to be a zealous second in command of a specialized force designed to deal with mage threats. And not when Anders is right in front of him when the game laughibly pretends to give us the choice to turn him over, when the only thing that supposedely protected him from arrest was the Champion's friendship. They doin't even have to investigate, Anders is a mage outside the Circle, period, it's his duty to apprehend him, the Champion's friendship is irrelevent in that scenario.

That imo, is pushing stupidity to another level. And I don't mind stupidity being shown, but when almost no character in DA2 is shown as competent? That for me is a problem.

I would also add that many people seem really hung up on moments like this in the game, where presented with a choice, the game fails to allow them to enact that choice. Or the outcome of their choice isn't as they hoped. (eg an event happens, or doesn't happen regardless). And see this as a failing.

Well no, again, just like real life, sometimes you think your choice matters but it doesn't. (But you still get to make that choice) Sometimes events proceed in a certain way irrespective of what you choose to do.

So I don't see that being presented with a choice to hand Anders in and it not happening is fundamentally a flaw in the game. (It seems some feel their choices should have resulted in stopping Anders doing what he did). No, thats one of those plot points that are inevitable. Literature and film is full of such moments

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

txgoldrush wrote...

DinoSteve wrote...

I think people are reading a little to much into the story of DA2, and no one is talking about how it is told, and it is told very poorly

and DAO was told pretty poorly...is just that most fans don't want to recognize this.

seems to me that the majority of people disagree with you about this, at least DAO had strong plot unlike DA2 which had 3 luke warm plots which added nothing to the overall lore of Dragon Age

[Theagg]

Melca36 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...


How is Meredith poorly developed? Many people miss the chance to develop her...thats the flaw, not that she lacks development.

You are trying to say that DAII wasn't about anything at all, and that is not true.

David Gaider in a recent interview has even said there WAS NOT enough Orsino and Meredith at the end!

Too much was cut from ACT 3 and that is WHY IT MADE LITTLE SENSE AT THE END!!!

Ahh so this will all reappear in the extended directors cut edition thenB)

[Il Divo]

In Exile wrote...

I just wanted to echo this sentiment, as this was my main problem with the story in DA:O (and in many Bioware games, to be honest, aside from JE).

The best test of the strength of the 'call to adventure' section is the extent to which you can remove content without changing the story of the main plot.

In DA:O, you can effectively go to the Landsmeet directly (perhaps by way of Redcliffe) and you've retained the entire main plot. In KoTOR, you can go to Dantoine - Leviathan - Star Forge and keep the plot. In ME, you can just go Citadel  - Ilos.

Bioware hasn't written a narrative since JE, and BGII was their only other narrative.

As always, your posts sum up my thoughts entirely. I think the test is especially important. I often see Bioware praised for their storylines, yet they have remarkably little-depth because of how much time the player actually spends performing unrelated tasks.

In a strange way, even a game series like Modern Warfare does a better job of this, if only because the storyline stays focused on the task at hand.

Hell, I loved KotOR, but what exactly did Tatooine have to do with stopping the Sith?

DA2's disconnected plot is just a symptom of the general writing style at Bioware. It's just that, for whatever reason, people started disliking this approach with DA2. Maybe it made the style too obvious. I don't know.

I agree. It's similar some blame the dialogue wheel for 'narrowing down' the PC's responses, while praising Mass Effect's system or previous games.

There is one distinction though: In KotOR, collecting the Star Maps has a role in the story, even if it doesn't add anything to the narrative. You need to collect the Star Maps to reach the Star Forge. During the 'choose your mission' moments in DA2, it's not quite clear why Hawke must do all these quests, beyond their being listed in the 'main quest' section. Ex: If I already have Bartrand's 50g, why is it necessary that I help the Qunari?

It's minor, but that one distinction seems to be enough for some fans to think that DA:O had a substantially better plot-line.

Modifié par Il Divo, 26 juin 2011 - 07:21 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Theagg wrote...
So I don't see that being presented with a choice to hand Anders in and it not happening is fundamentally a flaw in the game. (It seems some feel their choices should have resulted in stopping Anders doing what he did). No, thats one of those plot points that are inevitable. Literature and film is full of such moments

It is flawed when they don't even try and the only excuse is complete idiocy.

They didn't have to have Anders get arrested. They could have had Cullen try to surround him, Anders unleashing vengeance, escaping and then doing what he was supposed to do at the end.

This is not about the game not allowing us to control the situation. It's about the game mocking us with a tease of a choice that it just ignores completely.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 26 juin 2011 - 07:27 .

[alex90c]

Theagg wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Theagg wrote...
As to Cullen ignoring the potential threat that has been presented to him in the form of Anders and not taking action. Yep, perhaps Cullen was stupid but that's no more different than real life cases where members of the authority have ignored the warnings of others about potentially dangerous individuals. Or ignored the intelligence data presented to them.

Not when he is supposed to be a zealous second in command of a specialized force designed to deal with mage threats. And not when Anders is right in front of him when the game laughibly pretends to give us the choice to turn him over, when the only thing that supposedely protected him from arrest was the Champion's friendship. They doin't even have to investigate, Anders is a mage outside the Circle, period, it's his duty to apprehend him, the Champion's friendship is irrelevent in that scenario.

That imo, is pushing stupidity to another level. And I don't mind stupidity being shown, but when almost no character in DA2 is shown as competent? That for me is a problem.

I would also add that many people seem really hung up on moments like this in the game, where presented with a choice, the game fails to allow them to enact that choice. Or the outcome of their choice isn't as they hoped. (eg an event happens, or doesn't happen regardless). And see this as a failing.

Well no, again, just like real life, sometimes you think your choice matters but it doesn't. (But you still get to make that choice) Sometimes events proceed in a certain way irrespective of what you choose to do.

So I don't see that being presented with a choice to hand Anders in and it not happening is fundamentally a flaw in the game. (It seems some feel their choices should have resulted in stopping Anders doing what he did). No, thats one of those plot points that are inevitable. Literature and film is full of such moments

The problem isn't being offered a decision and not being able to get it to happen (I mean, in moderation that's a pretty cool idea), the problem is that Hawke does nothing by himself, and when he does get the opportunity to be proactive (hey anders gtfo to the templars), they just happily ignore the fact that Anders could be up to something.

It's all context. Aveline's personal quest is a good example of being able to make a decision that doesn't work (she's not interested in Hawke), but being able to inform Cullen of Anders's plot and him just sitting there twiddling his thumbs is just bullsh*t.

I still feel that Fenris and Varric asking if we wanted to return to Ferelden or start a business in Kirkwall without us beng able to actually do something like that is such a mighty kick in the balls though. Why bring stuff like that up if you can't follow through with it? You're rich after the Deep Roads so you should realistically be allowed since the Blight's over and you can easily afford to travel back to Ferelden.

Modifié par alex90c, 26 juin 2011 - 07:28 .

[Nerevar-as]

txgoldrush wrote...


But does it end that way...no. It ends on the theme of sacrifice. Thats where the main conflict is headed. Does it have that theme of the dark side of human nature escalating things in it? Yes. But the main plot and the conflict does not revolve around it. It does in DAII. The main theme comes from the conflict between the main protagonist and the main antagonist, whether it is a character or a concept.

How is Meredith poorly developed? Many people miss the chance to develop her...thats the flaw, not that she lacks development.

You are trying to say that DAII wasn't about anything at all, and that is not true.

None of whom is Hawke, and that hurts narrative a lot.

About Meredith, her backstory only leaves clear the everyone with power in the Chantry is an idiot to put a person with such background in charge. Then again, the Chantry has been really stupid for centuries not realizing the Circle system was a time bomb. DA2 ending is karma paying a long delayed visit.

[Theagg]

DinoSteve wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

DinoSteve wrote...

I think people are reading a little to much into the story of DA2, and no one is talking about how it is told, and it is told very poorly

and DAO was told pretty poorly...is just that most fans don't want to recognize this.

seems to me that the majority of people disagree with you about this, at least DAO had strong plot unlike DA2 which had 3 luke warm plots which added nothing to the overall lore of Dragon Age

Hmm, strong plot for Origins. Debatable. I still can't get over how the miltary saviour of Ferelden abandons the field, knowing full well this would allow the Darkspawn to gain the upper hand and wipe out a large section of the forces required to deal with it. And decimate some of his beloved country in the process. Given the great strategist he is supposed to be his actions certainly were dramatic but not exactly smart. Or believable.

Well, perhaps someone can point me to a real life historical battle where a general has abandoned an army to the oncoming advance of an invading force and what that means strategically. Because of a personal grudge.

[Nerevar-as]

Theagg wrote...


Hmm, strong plot for Origins. Debatable. I still can't get over how the miltary saviour of Ferelden abandons the field, knowing full well this would allow the Darkspawn to gain the upper hand and wipe out a large section of the forces required to deal with it. And decimate some of his beloved country in the process. Given the great strategist he is supposed to be his actions certainly were dramatic but not exactly smart. Or believable.

Well, perhaps someone can point me to a real life historical battle where a general has abandoned an army to the oncoming advance of an invading force and what that means strategically. Because of a personal grudge.

Military strategist. The game shows clearly that as a political one, Loghain is quite bad.

[txgoldrush]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...
But does it end that way...no. It ends on the theme of sacrifice. Thats where the main conflict is headed. Does it have that theme of the dark side of human nature escalating things in it? Yes. But the main plot and the conflict does not revolve around it. It does in DAII. The main theme comes from the conflict between the main protagonist and the main antagonist, whether it is a character or a concept.

a) The main conflict with Loghain is all about human nature. And the fight against the Archdemon also becomes part of human nature, as the willingness to sacrifice one's life or not, is a part of it. Especially when Morrigan gives you a way out. So your "human nature" is tested with that choice. It's the Warden struggling against his own nature.

If you want to, so very poorly, argue that DA2 is about Hawke against human nature, I'll say the same about the Warden and that the end is about him fighting his own nature.

And I'll even add something more. Being a warden in and of itself makes you barely human. Morrigan and others talk about it. That you essentially become halfdarkspawn and slowly descend to madness throughout your life. So Origins is about confronting that reality as well.

How is Meredith poorly developed? Many people miss the chance to develop her...thats the flaw, not that she lacks development.

You are trying to say that DAII wasn't about anything at all, and that is not true.

A character exposition in the last 10 minutes of the game is not development. It's character exposition (a very desperate and poor one). Character development is an on-going process that should be seen, and not just told, throughout the game. Especially when the hag's face shows up when the game starts.
Saren was developped. Loghain was developped. Meredith was not.

DA2, as it stands, is barely about anything all. It may have wanted to be about a rise to power that never happens, or about human nature that gets eclysped by all the inhuman elements. But that's not what we got.

a) I sLogain the main antagonist? No he is not. Yes, the story features the theme, but it isn't ABOUT THE THEME!!!!. Its like saying Final Fantasy VI is about how humans quest for power has cost. FFVI has that plot theme and element play a major role (leading to the World of Ruin), but the story is not really about that. Its really about finding that life has meaning. Thats what the main conflict ends up being about. A work can feature multiple themes, but one is always the most prominent and ties to the conflict the most. And in DAO's case, is the sacrifcies of being a Warden.

Meredith reveals her backstory if you side with her in the argument (or remain nuetral) at th eacts BEGINNING and complete the first main quest in the act. Then she will reveal why she is where she is and what happened to her sister. Its the fact that this can be easily missed that the problem occurs. Orsino however, is underdeveloped. However, he is not really that major of a character. Meredith is the more important one of the two..and Anders is more of a foil to her than Orsino is.

and once again...a story can feature inhuman elements and still very well be much about human themes. You keep denying this.

[txgoldrush]

Nerevar-as wrote...

Theagg wrote...


Hmm, strong plot for Origins. Debatable. I still can't get over how the miltary saviour of Ferelden abandons the field, knowing full well this would allow the Darkspawn to gain the upper hand and wipe out a large section of the forces required to deal with it. And decimate some of his beloved country in the process. Given the great strategist he is supposed to be his actions certainly were dramatic but not exactly smart. Or believable.

Well, perhaps someone can point me to a real life historical battle where a general has abandoned an army to the oncoming advance of an invading force and what that means strategically. Because of a personal grudge.

Military strategist. The game shows clearly that as a political one, Loghain is quite bad.

I found Loghain to be quite poorly written, unlike some other prominent major Bioware antagonists like Saren, Sun Li, Malak, or Irenicus.

[Theagg]

Il Divo wrote...

DA2's disconnected plot is just a symptom of the general writing style at Bioware. It's just that, for whatever reason, people started disliking this approach with DA2. Maybe it made the style too obvious. I don't know.

I agree. It's similar some blame the dialogue wheel for 'narrowing down' the PC's responses, while praising Mass Effect's system or previous games.

.

The dialogue wheel reduced dialogue choices, apparently. Or did it ?

In Origins you may have been presented with perhaps 4, 5 or 6 options of dialogue. But how many of these, if selected, genuinely pointed off down uniquely different dialogue tree branches ? How many of them were simply much the same thing phrased slightly differently, therefore not having much difference in affecting the NPC response. Did each one of those text dialogue selections presented, if selected have different raminfications for how the game unfolded later on ?

And, many people bemoan that what came out of Hawkes mouth didn't match the sentiment they thought they were expressing when clicking the dialogue wheel choice. This is true. However, the text dialogue choices in Origins, all 6 of them say , often left me thinking that none of those text choices presented were how I wanted my Warden to reply anyway. Some of them, written in their full glory were just bizarre.

So both mechanics have problems.

Modifié par Theagg, 26 juin 2011 - 07:43 .

[Nerevar-as]

I found him far better written than those, Saren was a complete monster even before meeting Sovie, and Sun Li and Malak were for the evulz villains. BG2 is still in my to play list.

[Il Divo]

Theagg wrote...

The dialogue wheel reduced dialogue choices, apparently. Or did it ?

In Origins you may have been presented with perhaps 4, 5 or 6 options of dialogue. But how many of these, if selected, genuinely pointed off down uniquely different dialogue tree branches ? How many of them were simply much the same thing phrased slightly differently, therefore not having much difference in affecting the NPC response. Did each one of those text dialogue selections presented, if selected have different raminfications for how the game unfolded later on ?

And, many people bemoan that what came out of Hawkes mouth didn't match the sentiment they thought they were expressing when clicking the dialogue wheel choice. This is true. However, the text dialogue choices in Origins, all 6 of them say , often left me thinking that none of those text choices presented were how I wanted my Warden to reply anyway. Some of them, written in their full glory were just bizarre.

So both mechanics have problems.

I agree. I think the real problem is that because DA2 began to provide 'tone icons', instead of players now choosing what tone they think is appropriate for a situation, they stick with a single tone and that becomes Hawke's 'character'. People don't like the tone icons because it exposes how basic the Bioware dialogue really is:

1) Good response.
2) Neutral response/questions.
3) Evil response.

And that's the extent of it. DA2 (imo) didn't dumb it down. It just dispels the illusion.

Modifié par Il Divo, 26 juin 2011 - 07:51 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

txgoldrush wrote...
a) I sLogain the main antagonist? No he is not. Yes, the story features the theme, but it isn't ABOUT THE THEME!!!!. And in DAO's case, is the sacrifcies of being a Warden.

Loghain is a main antognist yes. And yes, it's about the theme. Self-sacrifice is part of human nature, just like greed is. No amount of capital letters and exclamation points is going to change that.

When you rely on nonsense like that, anything can be made into a theme about human nature.

Meredith reveals her backstory if you side with her in the argument (or remain nuetral) at th eacts BEGINNING and complete the first main quest in the act. .

At the beginning of the last Act of the game. That's nto development as she already had the idol by that point. We do not see her evolve. So it's character exposition.

Inhuman elements coming in lieu of character development and making them be insane lunatics, is not really about human nature. It's just a lazy way to avoid writing a human story that involves a lot more effort.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 26 juin 2011 - 07:59 .

[txgoldrush]

Nerevar-as wrote...

I found him far better written than those, Saren was a complete monster even before meeting Sovie, and Sun Li and Malak were for the evulz villains. BG2 is still in my to play list.

For the Evulz villains don't mean poorly written.

Look at Suikoden II's Luca Blight...probably the most evil character in video game history, was handled very well and had an epic poetic downfall.

Kefka fits FFVI's themes like a glove. Not a deep villian but a very effective one when it comes to plot.

Saren played  a much better role in the story and had more reasonable goals. Master Li becomes a Maginificant Bastard and is responsible for the disorder in the world. What amkes him truly great is that he doesn't care about anyone...even when you thinbk he did.

Loghain is just a moron who didn't know what he was doing. His plans and goals just did not make sense at all. Why would you even divide a kingdom when a looming threat is coming. If he is supposed to be stupid thats fine, but if he was intended to be smart, Bioware fell on its face.

[Theagg]

Il Divo wrote...


I agree. I think the real problem is that because DA2 began to provide 'tone icons', instead of players now choosing what tone they think is appropriate for a situation, they stick with a single tone and that becomes Hawke's 'character'. People don't like the tone icons because it exposes how basic the Bioware dialogue really is:

1) Good response.
2) Neutral response/questions.
3) Evil response.

And that's the extent of it. DA2 (imo) didn't dumb it down. It just dispels the illusion.

Good way of putting it and to further the point, any response any player character can make in games like these will ultimately be one of several choices that the writer, not the player, thinks is suitable. In some case, the writers ideal response and the players will match. Sometimes they wont.

But the player can never truly give the response they want to. Not until we have games that are fully fledged AI's in a box that 'understand' human speech and context. We are a long, long way from the Holo deck yet.