585 réponses à ce sujet

[txgoldrush]

Yrkoon wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...


DAII is badly flawed.

You could have just written this in your OP and saved everyone 3 pages of  pointless nonsense.   LOL

which I did in my OP...go back and read.

Its the notion that DAO isn't that I have a problem with.

[Yrkoon]

But.... you've never played DA:O.

And apparently this is one gigantic straw man on your part, since  not a SINGLE person on this thread, or anywhere on this forum has ever claimed that DA:O was flawless.  Not to mention the fact that at least 7 people  have already pointed this out to you on this very thread.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 25 juin 2011 - 08:20 .

[txgoldrush]

Yrkoon wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...


No I am not moving the goalposts...simple fact is that DAII has one more ending than PS: T does. One percise outcome for the Nameless One. Blood War, thats it,

That's retarded.    Using that silly  logic, DA2  doesn't  have an ending.    Hawke   causes a civil war.  period.   - which is the opposite of an ending.  lol

No it is an ending....

Nope.  Starting a war  is not an ending, by definition.

if the story is how someone starts a war, it is an ending. The story is Varric telling Cassandra how the war comes about, and how Hawke is not fully responsible.

In fact, Hawke is acquitted at the end.

[txgoldrush]

Yrkoon wrote...

But.... you've never played DA:O.

No I have, 3 times. Played through every Origin story as well.

[Yrkoon]

txgoldrush wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...


No I am not moving the goalposts...simple fact is that DAII has one more ending than PS: T does. One percise outcome for the Nameless One. Blood War, thats it,

That's retarded.    Using that silly  logic, DA2  doesn't  have an ending.    Hawke   causes a civil war.  period.   - which is the opposite of an ending.  lol

No it is an ending....

Nope.  Starting a war  is not an ending, by definition.

if the story is how someone starts a war,

It's not.

[ItsTheTruth]

Nobody said DA:O story was very original, it is just a really great game anyway in every respect, like combat for example.

DA2 is a piece of crap and not even original either: the story is basically the mage tower of DA:O extended with 50 fetch quests in The Cave.

[txgoldrush]

Yrkoon wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...


No I am not moving the goalposts...simple fact is that DAII has one more ending than PS: T does. One percise outcome for the Nameless One. Blood War, thats it,

That's retarded.    Using that silly  logic, DA2  doesn't  have an ending.    Hawke   causes a civil war.  period.   - which is the opposite of an ending.  lol

No it is an ending....

Nope.  Starting a war  is not an ending, by definition.

if the story is how someone starts a war,

It's not.

Then what is it about then?

The outside story is how at first Cassandra thinks that Hawke is SOLELY to blame for the conflict, but at the end of Varrics tale, realizes not only Hawke, while his or her presence esclataied things and made the conflict possible, is not the one responsible for causing it and in fact may be the key to ending it.

Thats the story.

[Persephone]

ItsTheTruth wrote...

DA2 is a piece of crap and not even original either: the story is basically the mage tower of DA:O extended with 50 fetch quests in The Cave.

No offense, but that's just as over the top and narrow minded as you accuse the OP of being. Never mind that you are completely wrong. Pot calling the kettle black?

[Yrkoon]

txgoldrush wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...


No I am not moving the goalposts...simple fact is that DAII has one more ending than PS: T does. One percise outcome for the Nameless One. Blood War, thats it,

That's retarded.    Using that silly  logic, DA2  doesn't  have an ending.    Hawke   causes a civil war.  period.   - which is the opposite of an ending.  lol

No it is an ending....

Nope.  Starting a war  is not an ending, by definition.

if the story is how someone starts a war,

It's not.

Then what is it about then?

Hawke's Rise to power.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Rise to Power? Story of Kirkwall? I thought those were the major narrative elements, not Cassandra realising that Hawke was not to blame for the conflict. That felt more like a sequel hook than anything.

[txgoldrush]

mrcrusty wrote...

Rise to Power? Story of Kirkwall? I thought those were the major narrative elements, not Cassandra realising that Hawke was not to blame for the conflict. That felt more like a sequel hook than anything.

Then why the frame narrative? If thats not the story, then what is then?

Hawke's rise to power was the inside story of the frame, but the outside is about what I just said earlier.

If it was soley about his or her rise to power than there would be no Cassandra.

[Persephone]

Yrkoon wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...


No I am not moving the goalposts...simple fact is that DAII has one more ending than PS: T does. One percise outcome for the Nameless One. Blood War, thats it,

That's retarded.    Using that silly  logic, DA2  doesn't  have an ending.    Hawke   causes a civil war.  period.   - which is the opposite of an ending.  lol

No it is an ending....

Nope.  Starting a war  is not an ending, by definition.

if the story is how someone starts a war,

It's not.

Then what is it about then?

Hawke's Rise to power.

And DAII showed that too. We'll see where it leads in future content. (Awakening sized, I hope!) Same as seeing my Warden's tenure as Warden Commander in Awakening, as "hooked" in the Epilogue Dos Box.:happy:

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

txgoldrush wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

Rise to Power? Story of Kirkwall? I thought those were the major narrative elements, not Cassandra realising that Hawke was not to blame for the conflict. That felt more like a sequel hook than anything.

Then why the frame narrative? If thats not the story, then what is then?

Hawke's rise to power was the inside story of the frame, but the outside is about what I just said earlier.

If it was soley about his or her rise to power than there would be no Cassandra.

Lol, why the framed narrative indeed...

I think that's where our opinions differ. I think of the framed narrative as a superfluous gimmick, whereas you're trying to ascribe meaning to it.

Modifié par mrcrusty, 25 juin 2011 - 08:41 .

[ItsTheTruth]

Persephone wrote...

ItsTheTruth wrote...

DA2 is a piece of crap and not even original either: the story is basically the mage tower of DA:O extended with 50 fetch quests in The Cave.

No offense, but that's just as over the top and narrow minded as you accuse the OP of being. Never mind that you are completely wrong. Pot calling the kettle black?

I didn't accuse the OP of anything. As for my description of DA2, it is very accurate: story is the DA:O Circle tower but set in a Denerim-like city, extended with 50 fecth quests in The Cave or on The Coast, and with Dynasty Warriors combat. I.e flaming piece of crap and the worst game I have ever played to the end (just because of the DA name).

[txgoldrush]

mrcrusty wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

Rise to Power? Story of Kirkwall? I thought those were the major narrative elements, not Cassandra realising that Hawke was not to blame for the conflict. That felt more like a sequel hook than anything.

Then why the frame narrative? If thats not the story, then what is then?

Hawke's rise to power was the inside story of the frame, but the outside is about what I just said earlier.

If it was soley about his or her rise to power than there would be no Cassandra.

Lol, why the framed narrative indeed...

I think that's where our opinions differ. I think of the framed narrative as a superflous gimmick, whereas you're trying to ascribe meaning to it.

its not to be ignored...its no sequel hook just to be a sequel hook. It is to show that the conflict is much deeper than just simple explanation. The outside story of the frame narrative always frames the story.

[Persephone]

mrcrusty wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

Rise to Power? Story of Kirkwall? I thought those were the major narrative elements, not Cassandra realising that Hawke was not to blame for the conflict. That felt more like a sequel hook than anything.

Then why the frame narrative? If thats not the story, then what is then?

Hawke's rise to power was the inside story of the frame, but the outside is about what I just said earlier.

If it was soley about his or her rise to power than there would be no Cassandra.

Lol, why the framed narrative indeed...

I think that's where our opinions differ. I think of the framed narrative as a superfluous gimmick, whereas you're trying to ascribe meaning to it.

No need to try, that IS exactly its purpose and meaning. It succeeds with some & doesn't with others. Same as DAO working for some while others mock it as LOTR Lite. Or are put off by orcs being sold off as darkspawn. ;)

[txgoldrush]

ItsTheTruth wrote...

Persephone wrote...

ItsTheTruth wrote...

DA2 is a piece of crap and not even original either: the story is basically the mage tower of DA:O extended with 50 fetch quests in The Cave.

No offense, but that's just as over the top and narrow minded as you accuse the OP of being. Never mind that you are completely wrong. Pot calling the kettle black?

I didn't accuse the OP of anything. As for my description of DA2, it is very accurate: story is the DA:O Circle tower but set in a Denerim-like city, extended with 50 fecth quests in The Cave or on The Coast, and with Dynasty Warriors combat. I.e flaming piece of crap and the worst game I have ever played to the end (just because of the DA name).

so the Qunari is part of the Circle Tower quest?

Lol

[Yrkoon]

txgoldrush wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

Rise to Power? Story of Kirkwall? I thought those were the major narrative elements, not Cassandra realising that Hawke was not to blame for the conflict. That felt more like a sequel hook than anything.

Then why the frame narrative?.

To present the story as something that took place in the past-  and more importantly, to let the player know that in the present, something nasty is  going on.    This  only reiterates  that there's been no ending.  No resolution.  No conclusion.

  And One need only read Mike Laidlaw's recent posts about this subject to confirm this FACT.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 25 juin 2011 - 08:47 .

[Persephone]

ItsTheTruth wrote...

Persephone wrote...

ItsTheTruth wrote...

DA2 is a piece of crap and not even original either: the story is basically the mage tower of DA:O extended with 50 fetch quests in The Cave.

No offense, but that's just as over the top and narrow minded as you accuse the OP of being. Never mind that you are completely wrong. Pot calling the kettle black?

I didn't accuse the OP of anything. As for my description of DA2, it is very accurate: story is the DA:O Circle tower but set in a Denerim-like city, extended with 50 fecth quests in The Cave or on The Coast, and with Dynasty Warriors combat. I.e flaming piece of crap and the worst game I have ever played to the end (just because of the DA name).

It's as accurate as a zealot painting his beliefs as undeniable facts. Don't try to tell me anything about a game I definitely played far more than you. Won't work, dearie.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

txgoldrush wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

Rise to Power? Story of Kirkwall? I thought those were the major narrative elements, not Cassandra realising that Hawke was not to blame for the conflict. That felt more like a sequel hook than anything.

Then why the frame narrative? If thats not the story, then what is then?

Hawke's rise to power was the inside story of the frame, but the outside is about what I just said earlier.

If it was soley about his or her rise to power than there would be no Cassandra.

Lol, why the framed narrative indeed...

I think that's where our opinions differ. I think of the framed narrative as a superflous gimmick, whereas you're trying to ascribe meaning to it.

its not to be ignored...its no sequel hook just to be a sequel hook. It is to show that the conflict is much deeper than just simple explanation. The outside story of the frame narrative always frames the story.

Which could've been done just as easily without the framed narrative. Epilogue slides and a slightly longer cutscene between Cassandra and <spoiler> to introduce her as a character would've had the same impact.

Like I said, this is where we differ. I believe that the framed narrative had no real purpose that cannot be achieved through other, simpler means without changing the greater narrative whereas you think it does.

To me this is a case of "it's there because it is" rather than a "it's there because it serves a purpose that would otherwise be impossible to achieve without it".

Modifié par mrcrusty, 25 juin 2011 - 08:48 .

[Persephone]

Yrkoon wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

Rise to Power? Story of Kirkwall? I thought those were the major narrative elements, not Cassandra realising that Hawke was not to blame for the conflict. That felt more like a sequel hook than anything.

Then why the frame narrative?.

To present the story as something that took place in the past-  and more importantly, to let the player know that in the present, something nasty is  going on  -Ie.  there's been no ending.  No resolution.  No conclusion.

One need only read Mike Laidlaw's recent posts about this subject to confirm this FACT.

So a cliffhanger/open ending is NO ENDING.

So "Gone With The Wind" had no ending?

Thanks for proving millions of readers wrong with this fact.

Modifié par Persephone, 25 juin 2011 - 08:49 .

[ItsTheTruth]

txgoldrush wrote...

I didn't accuse the OP of anything. As for my description of DA2, it is very accurate: story is the DA:O Circle tower but set in a Denerim-like city, extended with 50 fecth quests in The Cave or on The Coast, and with Dynasty Warriors combat. I.e flaming piece of crap and the worst game I have ever played to the end (just because of the DA name).

so the Qunari is part of the Circle Tower quest?

Lol

The Qunari in DA2 is like Flemeth, irrelevant and meaningless. Bioware couldn't even bother mentioning whatever happened to either at the end. That says to me: "Buy our next games to see what the hell this was about!"

Modifié par ItsTheTruth, 25 juin 2011 - 08:48 .

[Yrkoon]

Persephone wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

Rise to Power? Story of Kirkwall? I thought those were the major narrative elements, not Cassandra realising that Hawke was not to blame for the conflict. That felt more like a sequel hook than anything.

Then why the frame narrative?.

To present the story as something that took place in the past-  and more importantly, to let the player know that in the present, something nasty is  going on  -Ie.  there's been no ending.  No resolution.  No conclusion.

One need only read Mike Laidlaw's recent posts about this subject to confirm this FACT.

So a cliffhanger/open ending is NO ENDING.

It wasn't an open ending.   It wasn't an ending at all.   It was a cliff hanger.  To use  your book comparison, it'd be like  someone  quit reading Gone with the Wind  halfway through.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 25 juin 2011 - 08:50 .

[Persephone]

ItsTheTruth wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

I didn't accuse the OP of anything. As for my description of DA2, it is very accurate: story is the DA:O Circle tower but set in a Denerim-like city, extended with 50 fecth quests in The Cave or on The Coast, and with Dynasty Warriors combat. I.e flaming piece of crap and the worst game I have ever played to the end (just because of the DA name).

so the Qunari is part of the Circle Tower quest?

Lol

The Qunari in DA2 is like Flemeth, irrelevant and meaningless. Bioware couldn't even bother mentioning whatever happened to either at the end. That says to me: "Buy our next games to see what the hell this was about!"

And people think the OP hasn't played DAO.........

[Persephone]

Yrkoon wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

Rise to Power? Story of Kirkwall? I thought those were the major narrative elements, not Cassandra realising that Hawke was not to blame for the conflict. That felt more like a sequel hook than anything.

Then why the frame narrative?.

To present the story as something that took place in the past-  and more importantly, to let the player know that in the present, something nasty is  going on  -Ie.  there's been no ending.  No resolution.  No conclusion.

One need only read Mike Laidlaw's recent posts about this subject to confirm this FACT.

So a cliffhanger/open ending is NO ENDING.

It wasn't an open ending.  It was a cliff hanger.  To use  your book comparison, it'd be like  someone  quit reading
 Gone with the Wind  halfway through.

A cliffhanger ending IS an ending. Many books/movies/games use that.

Did "Gabriel Knight III" not have an ending either then?

And have you even READ GWTW? I doubt it, no offense.