583 réponses à ce sujet

[txgoldrush]

csfteeeer wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

In DAO, only Allistair will play any major role in the main plot except for one moment with Morrigan. Everyone else are talking codex entries, much more so than other Bioware games KOTOR and after.

 OK,  it's pretty clear now that you're just trying to keep this stupid thread of yours  alive.  Because you've been corrected on this point at least 10 times.

Logain  *also* plays a major role in the main plot. 

And  who cares anyway?   Since when  do we measure an RPG's story on  the plot roles  of your party members?  In a party based RPG,  your companions are supposed to be tied to *YOU*, Not the plot.  BG2 only had *one* party member  tied to the main plot, and even that seemed  unnaturally forced  and ret-conned for drama purposes.  It certainly wasn't necessary.   BG2 would still be one of the best RPGs ever created even if Imoen didn't exist at all.

And what other roles do characters other than Alistair and a major antagonist for 90% of the game play in the plot.

Morrigan - only really important for one choice and could easily be written out of the story.
Leliana - can be completely missed and plays no role in the plot
Sten - same as well
Wynne - plays a small role in Mages tower quest and can be killed upon meeting her.
Shale - can be completely missed.
Oghren - plays a small role only because of his relationship with Branka, otherwise insignificant.
Zervan - only plays a role when Loghain hires him.

Other than Alistair, the main party does almost NOTHING plotwise. They are just there. There is no moment (other than the endgame) where you are confronted by a party member over an issue that you have to diffuse (like Wrex), have to choose between saving a life of one of your party members over another (like Ashley or Kaiden), get to play as one of them in an important event (the rescue of Revan), sacrifice themselves to save everyone else (Sagacious Zu), etc. They are window dressing talking codex entries, nothing more. And any controversey for the most part can be avoided by not bringing said party member into the situation.

DAO fans just do not want to admit this flaw.

*Sniffs*

*Gasp*

do you smell that? i smell.... Some BullS**t.

you didn't answered to anything he said is his Reply.

the question was, Since when do we qualify a plot by the Party Members? he even gave an example for BG2, which is correct btw, and the only thing you did was answer a question he didn't even asked.

He is absolutely right, you're trying to keep this thread alive.

 In a party based RPG, your companions are supposed to be tied to *YOU*, Not the plot.

This is not even worth discussing as there are PLENTY of party based RPGs with characters TIED TO THE PLOT!!!!! In fact, a majority of them.

And he is wrong about BGII, Imoen gives the player the motive in the beginning.and also shares the perdictament the player is in later. It gave teh game a personal drive.

[FJVP]

txgoldrush wrote...

Being cliche shows lack of creativity, lack of talent, lack of uniqueness, and laziness. DAO was lazy, it was a by the numbers plot ripped from fantasy works before such as LOTR and Song of Ice and Fire. In fact, the entire game was conservative and lazy, by the numbers RPG that does nothing new and nothing original. Even the "Orgin" stories have been done before and even done better, such as Sieken Densetsu 3 (Secret of Mana's sequel).

Even its battle system, a complete rip off of FFXII isn't unique. In fact the FFXII International Zodiac Job System version of the game ANNIHILATES DAO in character customization when it comes to leveling your character.

Ever thought that DAO's plot is easier to understand and easier to put together. Its due to the format DAII has. People are wrong when they say it has no clear main plot. Hint: It does. Its that you have to pay attention. Its not perfect however mostly because it was rushed. But I will take a flawed unique story over a tired and overdone cliche done well any day. Why? Because cliche shows less effort.

Its not that DAO was just cliche, like most RPGs, its that it REEKS of it.

You should've started with "In my opinion", because that is all this is. And I repeat, being cliche does not mean that something is bad, you may have liked DA2 more than Origins and that's fine, but trying to say that DA2 is better simply because DA:O follows the same "defeat this evil" plot is just wrong. As long as the story that follows this model is handled well I don't see any problems with repeating it. And I take it that you haven't been paying enough attention to the forums? Because several people have already proved that nothing in DA2 is new either and other games did it better.

Modifié par FJVP, 25 juillet 2011 - 03:51 .

[txgoldrush]

FJVP wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Being cliche shows lack of creativity, lack of talent, lack of uniqueness, and laziness. DAO was lazy, it was a by the numbers plot ripped from fantasy works before such as LOTR and Song of Ice and Fire. In fact, the entire game was conservative and lazy, by the numbers RPG that does nothing new and nothing original. Even the "Orgin" stories have been done before and even done better, such as Sieken Densetsu 3 (Secret of Mana's sequel).

Even its battle system, a complete rip off of FFXII isn't unique. In fact the FFXII International Zodiac Job System version of the game ANNIHILATES DAO in character customization when it comes to leveling your character.

Ever thought that DAO's plot is easier to understand and easier to put together. Its due to the format DAII has. People are wrong when they say it has no clear main plot. Hint: It does. Its that you have to pay attention. Its not perfect however mostly because it was rushed. But I will take a flawed unique story over a tired and overdone cliche done well any day. Why? Because cliche shows less effort.

Its not that DAO was just cliche, like most RPGs, its that it REEKS of it.

You should've started with "In my opinion", because that is all this is. And I repeat, being cliche does not mean that something is bad, you may have liked DA2 more than Origins and that's fine, but trying to say that DA2 is better simply because DA:O follows the same "defeat this evil" plot is just wrong. As long as the story that follows this model is handled well I don't see any problems with repeating it. And I take it that you haven't been paying enough attention to the forums? Because several people have already proved that nothing in DA2 is new either and other games did it better.

Very little is new in DAII however, what it rehashes and reuses is far less tired and overused than what DAO used. The story is also told in a far more unique manner than DAO is as well.

Gamewise, the most similiar game to it is the  first Witcher game as Kirkwall and Vizima are alot alike and both end in civil unrest and fighting between the two factions. However, how many games are like the Witcher, and how many games are by the numbers save the world plots like DAO?

Even if you do have a save the world plot, some games make it unique and interesting which DAO FAILS to do. Take for example, Legend of Zelda Majora's Mask, yes, its a save the world plot, however, it is setup in a very unique and refreshing fashion with the three day cycle. FFVI, the world gets destroyed and you have to save whats left of it, a shock back in 1994. Chrono Trigger, you try and change the past. Radiant Historia, released this year, the end of the world can come from a bad decision by the player, forcing him to rewind time. Whats DAO's unique aspect to the "save the world" trope? Absolutely nothing.

Look at book or movie critics, what do you think they will do when a book or film follows formual without trying something new and interesting. Trash it.... Why? Because its lazy and shows lack of talent.

Being grossly cliche means you are working off someone else's talent more than your own.

[FJVP]

And yet you keep talking as if your opinion is a fact, nice. May I ask where is the solid proof that can show me that DA:O lacked creativity and reeks of laziness? Can you link me to it, please?

[txgoldrush]

FJVP wrote...

And yet you keep talking as if your opinion is a fact, nice. May I ask where is the solid proof that can show me that DA:O lacked creativity and reeks of laziness? Can you link me to it, please?

and your proof that it doesn't....

In fact a common criticism in the reviews was that the story was not innovative or original.

[FJVP]

txgoldrush wrote...

FJVP wrote...

And yet you keep talking as if your opinion is a fact, nice. May I ask where is the solid proof that can show me that DA:O lacked creativity and reeks of laziness? Can you link me to it, please?

and your proof that it doesn't....

In fact a common criticism in the reviews was that the story was not innovative or original.

I never said that it didn't, you on the other hand do it in every opportunity you have. And I don't care about reviews, I rather form my own opinion, so I ask again: proof, please?

[txgoldrush]

FJVP wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

FJVP wrote...

And yet you keep talking as if your opinion is a fact, nice. May I ask where is the solid proof that can show me that DA:O lacked creativity and reeks of laziness? Can you link me to it, please?

and your proof that it doesn't....

In fact a common criticism in the reviews was that the story was not innovative or original.

I never said that it didn't, you on the other hand do it in every opportunity you have. And I don't care about reviews, I rather form my own opinion, so I ask again: proof, please?

The famous chart....

http://rampantgames....2/bwcliches.png

and prove to me that if Bioware keeps following cliches that it won't lead to increased criticism and diminishing returns.

Modifié par txgoldrush, 25 juillet 2011 - 04:36 .

[Harid]

txgoldrush wrote...

FJVP wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

FJVP wrote...

And yet you keep talking as if your opinion is a fact, nice. May I ask where is the solid proof that can show me that DA:O lacked creativity and reeks of laziness? Can you link me to it, please?

and your proof that it doesn't....

In fact a common criticism in the reviews was that the story was not innovative or original.

I never said that it didn't, you on the other hand do it in every opportunity you have. And I don't care about reviews, I rather form my own opinion, so I ask again: proof, please?

The famous chart....

http://rampantgames....2/bwcliches.png

and prove to me that if Bioware keeps following cliches that it won't lead to increased criticism and diminishing returns.

Part of what makes me regret Bioware failing with DA:2 is Bioware running back to this incessant chart.

They are going to become the Western Square-Enix if they keep up the blatant story rehashing, but some people seemingly want it so.

[txgoldrush]

Harid wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

FJVP wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

FJVP wrote...

And yet you keep talking as if your opinion is a fact, nice. May I ask where is the solid proof that can show me that DA:O lacked creativity and reeks of laziness? Can you link me to it, please?

and your proof that it doesn't....

In fact a common criticism in the reviews was that the story was not innovative or original.

I never said that it didn't, you on the other hand do it in every opportunity you have. And I don't care about reviews, I rather form my own opinion, so I ask again: proof, please?

The famous chart....

http://rampantgames....2/bwcliches.png

and prove to me that if Bioware keeps following cliches that it won't lead to increased criticism and diminishing returns.

Part of what makes me regret Bioware failing with DA:2 is Bioware running back to this incessant chart.

They are going to become the Western Square-Enix if they keep up the blatant story rehashing, but some people seemingly want it so.

for Mass Effect 3, I see no possible way other than to follow some of this chart, however Dragon Age III needs to be way different and so does a potential Jade Empire II.

Look at what happened to the Final Fantasy series...these guys are pros at taking unique setups and settings, and making the plot as cliched as possible...oh boy, lets save the world from a guy who wants to kill everyone because he is a nihilist. Its like they never learned to evolve past Kefka, starring a care free boy (Zidane, Tidus, Vaan) or a hardened mercenary (Cloud, Squall, Lightning)....except for Matsuno and his game FF Tactics.

[FJVP]

txgoldrush wrote...

The famous chart....

http://rampantgames....2/bwcliches.png

According to that chart DA:O ranks between second and third least cliche game by Bioware, so it seems that your over-reaction about Origins stinking of laziness and lack of creativeness was thrown out of the window, thank you for that.

and prove to me that if Bioware keeps following cliches that it won't lead to increased criticism and diminishing returns.

I would gladly do it, but sadly I don't work at Bioware so I don't know what their future plans are and if they plan to keep going with the format.

Modifié par FJVP, 25 juillet 2011 - 04:47 .

[Harid]

txgoldrush wrote...

Harid wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

FJVP wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

FJVP wrote...

And yet you keep talking as if your opinion is a fact, nice. May I ask where is the solid proof that can show me that DA:O lacked creativity and reeks of laziness? Can you link me to it, please?

and your proof that it doesn't....

In fact a common criticism in the reviews was that the story was not innovative or original.

I never said that it didn't, you on the other hand do it in every opportunity you have. And I don't care about reviews, I rather form my own opinion, so I ask again: proof, please?

The famous chart....

http://rampantgames....2/bwcliches.png

and prove to me that if Bioware keeps following cliches that it won't lead to increased criticism and diminishing returns.

Part of what makes me regret Bioware failing with DA:2 is Bioware running back to this incessant chart.

They are going to become the Western Square-Enix if they keep up the blatant story rehashing, but some people seemingly want it so.

for Mass Effect 3, I see no possible way other than to follow some of this chart, however Dragon Age III needs to be way different and so does a potential Jade Empire II.

Look at what happened to the Final Fantasy series...these guys are pros at taking unique setups and settings, and making the plot as cliched as possible...oh boy, lets save the world from a guy who wants to kill everyone because he is a nihilist. Its like they never learned to evolve past Kefka, starring a care free boy (Zidane, Tidus, Vaan) or a hardened mercenary (Cloud, Squall, Lightning)....except for Matsuno and his game FF Tactics.

Well, that's because Matsuno is actually talented.

And the Japanese actually want that regurgitated schlock.  Matsuno wanted the main character in FFXII to be Basch, and his company would not allow it, as he was too old, apparently.

I just always assumed WRPG fans were different.  But some of the posters here have made me question that, when I've seen people want to go back to that chart.

Modifié par Harid, 25 juillet 2011 - 04:53 .

[txgoldrush]

FJVP wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

The famous chart....

http://rampantgames....2/bwcliches.png

According to that chart DA:O ranks between second and third least cliche game by Bioware, so it seems that your over-reaction about Origins stinking of laziness and lack of creativeness was thrown out of the window, thank you for that.

and prove to me that if Bioware keeps following cliches that it won't lead to increased criticism and diminishing returns.

I would gladly do it, but sadly I don't work at Bioware so I don't know what their future plans are.

Actually, they get DAO off easy, some of its squares should easily be blue such as the four locations row, while for Jade Empire, that should be pink. And they are only really yellow because of the Origin stories.

But then Jedi, Spirit Monks, Spectres, and Grey Wardens...go figure.

"I would gladly do it, but sadly I don't work at Bioware so I don't know what their future plans are."

Because you can't....innovation and ideas are on S Curves, they may start slow when they are introduced and not very efficent or put together welll at first, but then they catch fire after it works, becomes popular but then becomes tired and diminishing returns occurs especially if their is a better idea that came about. Instead of Bioware riding diminishing returns, how about creating a new S curve...sometimes you start slow but then it can take off. The worst thing for Bioware to do is keepd oing the same formula over and over because they will be surpassed. CD Projeckt is almost able to match Bioware right now.

[In Exile]

txgoldrush wrote...
For the realm of Bioware, only Neverwinter Nights is worse when it comes to story. Its easily the most generic, predictable, and by the numbers fantasy plot. Thereis nothing new, nothing fresh, nothing different. KOTOR brought something different to the Star Wars universe, Baldur's Gate II told a unique D&D story, Jade Empire had a fresh and unique plot and setting (even with KOTOR similiariites), and Mass Effect takes sci fi cliches and blends them together in a unique universe. The world of DA is nothing but bland and cliche, a poor mans Witcher. At least DAII tries to solve this with a more interesting and smarter plot then kill the orcs.

Don't fly off the crazy train, now. DA:O was the same kind of story as KoTOR and ME1/ME2. 

[FJVP]

So now in order to try to cover up your mistake you go back to the same opinionated bs. And I did say that I can't prove it, didn't you get the point?

Since you're apparently fixated on only listening to what benefits you I think I'll just leave it here and have someone else tolerate your nonsense. I'm done.

[txgoldrush]

Harid wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Harid wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

FJVP wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

FJVP wrote...

And yet you keep talking as if your opinion is a fact, nice. May I ask where is the solid proof that can show me that DA:O lacked creativity and reeks of laziness? Can you link me to it, please?

and your proof that it doesn't....

In fact a common criticism in the reviews was that the story was not innovative or original.

I never said that it didn't, you on the other hand do it in every opportunity you have. And I don't care about reviews, I rather form my own opinion, so I ask again: proof, please?

The famous chart....

http://rampantgames....2/bwcliches.png

and prove to me that if Bioware keeps following cliches that it won't lead to increased criticism and diminishing returns.

Part of what makes me regret Bioware failing with DA:2 is Bioware running back to this incessant chart.

They are going to become the Western Square-Enix if they keep up the blatant story rehashing, but some people seemingly want it so.

for Mass Effect 3, I see no possible way other than to follow some of this chart, however Dragon Age III needs to be way different and so does a potential Jade Empire II.

Look at what happened to the Final Fantasy series...these guys are pros at taking unique setups and settings, and making the plot as cliched as possible...oh boy, lets save the world from a guy who wants to kill everyone because he is a nihilist. Its like they never learned to evolve past Kefka, starring a care free boy (Zidane, Tidus, Vaan) or a hardened mercenary (Cloud, Squall, Lightning)....except for Matsuno and his game FF Tactics.

Well, that's because Matsuno is actually talented.

And the Japanese actually want that regurgitated schlock.  Matsuno wanted the main character in FFXII to be Basch, and his company would not allow it, as he was too old, apparently.

I just always assumed WRPG fans were different.  But some of the posters here have made me question that, when I've seen people want to go back to that chart.

yep, thats what I am afraid of....that Bioware becomes another Squaresoft (SquareEnix)

I think FFVII ruined the Final Fantasy series and the entire JRPG genre in the long run while it had short run success. Mainstream JRPGs just stopped evolving. Now only Atlus truty bothers to try and really innovate. Radiant Historia is awesome and I heard Catherine is really good.

[txgoldrush]

In Exile wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...
For the realm of Bioware, only Neverwinter Nights is worse when it comes to story. Its easily the most generic, predictable, and by the numbers fantasy plot. Thereis nothing new, nothing fresh, nothing different. KOTOR brought something different to the Star Wars universe, Baldur's Gate II told a unique D&D story, Jade Empire had a fresh and unique plot and setting (even with KOTOR similiariites), and Mass Effect takes sci fi cliches and blends them together in a unique universe. The world of DA is nothing but bland and cliche, a poor mans Witcher. At least DAII tries to solve this with a more interesting and smarter plot then kill the orcs.

Don't fly off the crazy train, now. DA:O was the same kind of story as KoTOR and ME1/ME2. 

yes it was, but KOTOR and ME1 and ME2 were told much better as they reminded you of the main threat,

The main threats hounded you on KOTOR and ME planets, so you are reminded who your enemies are...Malak's Sith and Saren and his geth. It seems that in ME3, the reapers and indoctrinated Cerebrus agents attack you while you are getting allies.

Now what are the Darkspawns involvement in the four main middle quests, minimal...they only appear in the Deep Roads quest and they are not the main focus there. And the plot disconnect is far stronger because of it.

Modifié par txgoldrush, 25 juillet 2011 - 05:11 .

[txgoldrush]

FJVP wrote...

So now in order to try to cover up your mistake you go back to the same opinionated bs. And I did say that I can't prove it, didn't you get the point?

Since you're apparently fixated on only listening to what benefits you I think I'll just leave it here and have someone else tolerate your nonsense. I'm done.

I didn't make the mistake, they did.

How does Jade Empire follow "the four locations" formula? It doesn't...its chapter based. Fact, not an opinion.

And DAO strongly follows the four location, four sidequest format. There is no doubt about it.

Modifié par txgoldrush, 25 juillet 2011 - 05:14 .

[tmp7704]

txgoldrush wrote...

The main threats hounded you on KOTOR and ME planets, so you are reminded who your enemies are...

You don't even figure out what the main ME threat is until you're done with 3 places out of the "4 options" part.

[Yrkoon]

txgoldrush wrote...
In a party based RPG, your companions are supposed to be tied to *YOU*, Not the plot.

This is not even worth discussing as there are PLENTY of party based RPGs with characters TIED TO THE PLOT!!!!! In fact, a majority of them..

Bullsh*t.

BG1 companions tied to the plot?  Nope.  Not a single one
Bg2?  Nope, aside from imoen,
NWN1 or any of its expansions?  Nope.
Planescape Torment?  Nope.
Neverwinter Nights 2?  Nope, aside from  maybe Ammon Jerro.
Icewind Dale 1, or 2, or any of the expansions for that IP?  Absolutely not.
How about Dungeon Siege 1 or  Dungeon siege 2 or any of  their expansions?  Nope and nope and nope.
Temple of Elemental Evil?  Nope.

txgoldrush wrote...

yes it was, but KOTOR and ME1 and ME2 were told much better as they reminded you of the main threat,

Wait, are you actually trying to argue that DA:O doesn't pound you over the head *constantly*, in all 4 areas, with  the darkspoawn threat?

Hahahahaha.

You must not have ever played the f*cking game.  Either that or you're being obnoxiously dishonest here.  Which is it?

Modifié par Yrkoon, 25 juillet 2011 - 09:39 .

[iggy4566]

It never ends.

[Il Divo]

txgoldrush wrote...

A) That doesn't make Jacob goody goody, that just doesn't make him a bastard or an apologist like Miranda. None of the ME2 cast is goody goody. Even Garrus is brutal and ruthless. ME2 had a noticably darker cast than other bioware games.

How? Because he doesn't have a DnD alignment written under his name? He still fills that same role where you'd find Carth or Kaidan, or even Alistair. He's the mediator, the guy trying to do some good in the world, who opposes random acts of violence, with a sense of justice. Jacob really would act similar to any of those three characters in similar circumstances.

Wrong...The Archdemon is by definition, the main antagonist of Dragon Age, just like Soverign is in the first ME game. And no, Loghain is not the central conflict the PCs focus on, its always been the darkspawn. Loghain is less of an "antagonist" than Saren is in ME1. And taking all six star wars movies as a whole...Anakin/Vader is actually the MAIN PROTAGONIST.

Sovereign is not the main antagonist of Mass Effect. Anakin is simply the focal character of the first three films, which changes once we hit the original trilogy. And he's still the central villain, despite the Emperor pulling the strings. Likewise with Saren and Sovereign. We spend the events of Mass Effect hunting Saren, trying to figure out his plans. Loghain is the focus point of our efforts in DA:O. He's the one who abandons Ostagar, places a bounty on the Wardens, manipulates Red Cliff/the Circle, and is the focus of the Landsmeet.

C) Is Aveline really that good? Not really, she at times, unlike Alistair, Carth, Kaiden, Dawn Star, light side Bastila, and Leliana....will support an immoral action for the greater good. In fact, she wants you to extrajudically execute the magisters son. She will also look the other way whenever Hawke breaks the law, as well as his or her friends. She will support the Templars against the mages even if innocent mages are being killed. Far from the other typical goody leads, she is far more morally grey. Same with Sebastian who is in a personal conflict.

And Carth has a revenge complex. And Alistair wants to kill Loghain. And Bastila lied about your character's identity. Good does not mean perfect, as other Bioware characters have proven. She is not morally grey. She's still presented as the strong-willed female character, with a great sense of justice, who doesn't believe in killing for profit, lying, etc.  

F) Somewhat true, but DAO is far worse than most Bioware games. In Jade Empire, most of the characters will play a role in the story in one form or another. In ME1, Ashley and Kaiden are critical as well, and Liara doesn't have to even be recruited. Still a window dressing effect, but far less than DAO. At least the characters get their moments on Virmire. In ME2, they ARE the story.

I'm wondering if you've even played Mass Effect at this point. Liara must be recruited. She is how you get to Ilos in the first place. Ashley/Kaidan also are not necessary to the plot line. Virmire itself is simply an emotional plot point.

Most Bioware characters are window-dressing. A character playing a small role in the story does not make them essential to the plot. It simply demonstrates that Bioware wanted to explore a certain character type. Mission's role in the story is to unlock the door to the Vulkar Base. Jolee's role is to get you deeper into the Forest. Zaalbar doesn't actually do anything plot-essential. HK/Juhani don't even need to be recruited.

There are a million different characters who help you over the course of KotOR, and most other Bioware games. Any one of them could be potential squad mates, but Bioware did not choose those characters. Likewise with Mass Effect, Jade Empire, and Dragon Age 2.   

Varric and Anders, yes, but Aveline and Isabela as well. And even non essentials will play a role in the plot. Fenris is the ONLY exception.

See above response. Character being optional is not the only way that a character becomes window-dressing. If you think Mission opening a security door gives her a special role in the plot, well, that's a very strange position.

In DAO, only Allistair will play any major role in the main plot except for one moment with Morrigan. Everyone else are talking codex entries, much more so than other Bioware games KOTOR and after.

There is not a single Origins character that I would consider a talking codex entry. Actually, Mass Effect is the only game I would attribute where a character was designed as a codex, mainly due to Tali.

Sten
Shale
Wynne
Zevran
Leliana
Oghren

Character optional =! talking codex entry.

G) Keep grasping straws, but DAII is more similiar to The Witcher games Acts structure than Biowares "linear intro-open middle-linear end" approach. You cannot deny this. Not only that companions got one mission per act. Way more than the three talks and small sidequest formula.

I really don't care about the Witcher. Dragon Age II follows the Bioware plot structure almost exactly, and it follows the ME2 plot structure 100%. I showed you exactly how. You're barely even coherent at this point.

And Sky and Varric are NOT the same archetype other than the fact that they are rogues, and definitely not the same BIOWARE archtype.. Sky is a "Locke Cole" type character, a do gooder, a freedom fighter, and an avenger. Varric is not, he is only in for the friendship, not for some higher purpose. He has to morals other than love of his friends. In fact, he is kind of shady at times.

What? The fast-talking, Rogue, who likes to gamble? As I said, you're playing the detail game, trying to pass off Varric as some unique Bioware character, while claiming the entire DA:O cast is a cliche`. Varric is a fun character, but is not particularly different, beyond being a Dwarf Rogue. That doesn't stop him from being one of my favorite Bioware characters.

http://tvtropes.org/...n/LoveableRogue

Modifié par Il Divo, 25 juillet 2011 - 05:49 .

[iggy4566]

Il Divo wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

A) That doesn't make Jacob goody goody, that just doesn't make him a bastard or an apologist like Miranda. None of the ME2 cast is goody goody. Even Garrus is brutal and ruthless. ME2 had a noticably darker cast than other bioware games.

How? Because he doesn't have a DnD alignment written under his name? He still fills that same role where you'd find Carth or Kaidan, or even Alistair. He's the mediator, the guy trying to do some good in the world, who opposes random acts of violence, with a sense of justice. Jacob really would act similar to any of those three characters in similar circumstances.

Wrong...The Archdemon is by definition, the main antagonist of Dragon Age, just like Soverign is in the first ME game. And no, Loghain is not the central conflict the PCs focus on, its always been the darkspawn. Loghain is less of an "antagonist" than Saren is in ME1. And taking all six star wars movies as a whole...Anakin/Vader is actually the MAIN PROTAGONIST.

Sovereign is not the main antagonist of Mass Effect. Anakin is simply the focal character of the first three films, which changes once we hit the original trilogy. And he's still the central villain, despite the Emperor pulling the strings. Likewise with Saren and Sovereign. We spend the events of Mass Effect hunting Saren, trying to figure out his plans. Loghain is the focus point of our efforts in DA:O. He's the one who abandons Ostagar, places a bounty on the Wardens, manipulates Red Cliff/the Circle, and is the focus of the Landsmeet.

C) Is Aveline really that good? Not really, she at times, unlike Alistair, Carth, Kaiden, Dawn Star, light side Bastila, and Leliana....will support an immoral action for the greater good. In fact, she wants you to extrajudically execute the magisters son. She will also look the other way whenever Hawke breaks the law, as well as his or her friends. She will support the Templars against the mages even if innocent mages are being killed. Far from the other typical goody leads, she is far more morally grey. Same with Sebastian who is in a personal conflict.

And Carth has a revenge complex. And Alistair wants to kill Loghain. And Bastila lied about your character's identity. Good does not mean perfect, as other Bioware characters have proven. She is not morally grey. She's still presented as the strong-willed female character, with a great sense of justice, who doesn't believe in killing for profit, lying, etc.  

F) Somewhat true, but DAO is far worse than most Bioware games. In Jade Empire, most of the characters will play a role in the story in one form or another. In ME1, Ashley and Kaiden are critical as well, and Liara doesn't have to even be recruited. Still a window dressing effect, but far less than DAO. At least the characters get their moments on Virmire. In ME2, they ARE the story.

I'm wondering if you've even played Mass Effect at this point. Liara must be recruited. She is how you get to Ilos in the first place. Ashley/Kaidan also are not necessary to the plot line. Virmire itself is simply an emotional plot point.

Most Bioware characters are window-dressing. A character playing a small role in the story does not make them essential to the plot. It simply demonstrates that Bioware wanted to explore a certain character type. Mission's role in the story is to unlock the door to the Vulkar Base. Jolee's role is to get you deeper into the Forest. Zaalbar doesn't actually do anything plot-essential. HK/Juhani don't even need to be recruited.

There are a million different characters who help you over the course of KotOR, and most other Bioware games. Any one of them could be potential squad mates, but Bioware did not choose those characters. Likewise with Mass Effect, Jade Empire, and Dragon Age 2.   

Varric and Anders, yes, but Aveline and Isabela as well. And even non essentials will play a role in the plot. Fenris is the ONLY exception.

See above response. Character being optional is not the only way that a character becomes window-dressing. If you think Mission opening a security door gives her a special role in the plot, well, that's a very strange position.

In DAO, only Allistair will play any major role in the main plot except for one moment with Morrigan. Everyone else are talking codex entries, much more so than other Bioware games KOTOR and after.

There is not a single Origins character that I would consider a talking codex entry. Actually, Mass Effect is the only game I would attribute where a character was designed as a codex, mainly due to Tali.

Sten
Shale
Wynne
Zevran
Leliana
Oghren

Character optional =! talking codex entry.

G) Keep grasping straws, but DAII is more similiar to The Witcher games Acts structure than Biowares "linear intro-open middle-linear end" approach. You cannot deny this. Not only that companions got one mission per act. Way more than the three talks and small sidequest formula.

I really don't care about the Witcher. Dragon Age II follows the Bioware plot structure almost exactly, and it follows the ME2 plot structure 100%. I showed you exactly how. You're barely even coherent at this point.

And Sky and Varric are NOT the same archetype other than the fact that they are rogues, and definitely not the same BIOWARE archtype.. Sky is a "Locke Cole" type character, a do gooder, a freedom fighter, and an avenger. Varric is not, he is only in for the friendship, not for some higher purpose. He has to morals other than love of his friends. In fact, he is kind of shady at times.

What? The fast-talking, Rogue, who likes to gamble? As I said, you're playing the detail game, trying to pass off Varric as some unique Bioware character, while claiming the entire DA:O cast is a cliche`. Varric is a fun character, but is not particularly different, beyond being a Dwarf Rogue. That doesn't stop him from being one of my favorite Bioware characters.

http://tvtropes.org/...n/LoveableRogue

Good ol Tv Tropes.

[Sepewrath]

Areksu wrote...
No, I'm saying that the choice effects gameplay in a negative way. If you choose to hand over Isabella, you lose the only melee rogue you have, thus bringing unwanted metagame influence into the moral choice. DA:O avoids this problem. Also, the dialogue with Morrigan in the first game is counterbalanced by Alistair pointing out that you'd have to fight through an army to do that, rendering it impossible. Killing Patrice was completely within reason and hinted at by the dialogue.

Yeah you lose your dual melee fighter, that's kind of the point. Hawke is suppose to be thinking about the practicality of giving his person away vs the moral underlying of them paying for their crimes. This is how they tried to sell Loghain; Riordan and Anora were saying how beneficial he could be, how practical it would be to keep him. While Alistair was going about how morally you cant let this guy live. But the problem is that he is just interchangeable with Alistair, no matter which you pick, there is no difference.

You still end up with a SnS guy, who can get mauled by Morrigan no matter what you do. The choice is irrelevant, there is nothing to be gained, there is nothing to be lost. It is literally a fake choice. It would be like in the ME2 SM, if my Engineer died, when I went back to the ship, there was just another one in their spot. It made me pick whether or not they died, pointless. That is how basically all the choices in Origins went, the only one I can think of off the top of my head is the Sacred Ashes. Would you be willing to sacrifice Leliana and Wynne for the Reaver Spec. But then like I said, in spots like that, or choosing the Templar's in Circle Tower, there were gameplay work arounds, that negates the impact of the choice.

[Areksu]

iggy4566 wrote...

It never ends.

Nope, it never ends. Someone says one thing and then people like me can't help, but add their opinion.

[Areksu]

Sepewrath wrote...

Areksu wrote...
No, I'm saying that the choice effects gameplay in a negative way. If you choose to hand over Isabella, you lose the only melee rogue you have, thus bringing unwanted metagame influence into the moral choice. DA:O avoids this problem. Also, the dialogue with Morrigan in the first game is counterbalanced by Alistair pointing out that you'd have to fight through an army to do that, rendering it impossible. Killing Patrice was completely within reason and hinted at by the dialogue.

Yeah you lose your dual melee fighter, that's kind of the point. Hawke is suppose to be thinking about the practicality of giving his person away vs the moral underlying of them paying for their crimes. This is how they tried to sell Loghain; Riordan and Anora were saying how beneficial he could be, how practical it would be to keep him. While Alistair was going about how morally you cant let this guy live. But the problem is that he is just interchangeable with Alistair, no matter which you pick, there is no difference.

You still end up with a SnS guy, who can get mauled by Morrigan no matter what you do. The choice is irrelevant, there is nothing to be gained, there is nothing to be lost. It is literally a fake choice. It would be like in the ME2 SM, if my Engineer died, when I went back to the ship, there was just another one in their spot. It made me pick whether or not they died, pointless. That is how basically all the choices in Origins went, the only one I can think of off the top of my head is the Sacred Ashes. Would you be willing to sacrifice Leliana and Wynne for the Reaver Spec. But then like I said, in spots like that, or choosing the Templar's in Circle Tower, there were gameplay work arounds, that negates the impact of the choice.

And I am fine with that being your opinion. I favor game design where choices in game don't detract from the core gameplay, but rather offer different and unique ways of playing the game. I don't expect or want an exact gameplay clone of Isabella. It would be much more fulfilling if some other unique kind of character who fills a similar role would take her place as part of the moral decision. I'd rather do that than have my game deprive me of fun game mechanics for being good.
Also, Origins was more flexible. You could get away with killing off Leliana because Zevran could be specced for doing the same things that she does. Morrigan could likewise be given the spirit healer tree by tome to fill the roll of Wynne. In other words, there were ways to deal with the loss of a party member in Origins because the game was flexible enough to do that. Dragon Age 2 is not as flexible. Also, Dragon Age: Origins follows a different formula for story than Mass Effect. What is expected from the Dragon Age series in terms of storyline is different than what is expected of Mass Effect's storyline.

Modifié par Areksu, 26 juillet 2011 - 12:10 .