539 réponses à ce sujet

[Ryzaki]

jlb524 wrote...
I don't think Hawke was buffeted by the winds of fate.  S/he did things to gain influence in Act 1 which led to her being trusted in Act 2 by both the Viscount and the Arishok.  This is the reason that s/he was thrown into the qunari conflict at the end of that act and the reason why s/he was the one to stop the Arishok and gain the title of 'Champion'.  It wasn't on pure dumb luck.  

Desiring a Shepard/Warden figure is fine...I'm personally sick of it.  Those figures have power and responsiblitly on the basis of being in the Wardens/Spectres.   They have to do what they do and they have some backup.  Hawke is a different type of character.  S/he has no power and no responsibility.  The title of 'Champion' was bestowed upon her/him because of one deed, but there was no concrete expectations for future actions based on this.  Hawke could sit on her/his ass if desired, getting discounts at local shops, and do nothing for the city after that.  Hawke doesn't though, and still tries to help the people of Kirkwall to the best of her/his ability given that the title of 'Champion' carries no political power in Kirkwall.

Felt like dumb luck to me. Arishok picked him because he was the only one he could tolerate...which in a city like Kirkwall isn't some giant feat. Varric picked him for his fighting or stealth skills. Felt like important people saw Hawke and decided to use him/her like a blundgeoning tool. A glorified errand boy. Which really wasn't that different from the Warden but at least the Warden could go FU and have chronic backstabbing disorder. Hawke doesn't even get that. 

I don't mind that. I just don't like that kind of Slice of Life story. It irritates me. Really though Marketing is to blame for a lot of this. If they had marketed the game they made and not the game they pretended to make there would've been a lot less angry people. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 04 août 2011 - 05:44 .

[Cutlass Jack]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Even then warden is not going to wade into an army of darkspawn without a chance of winning. That is called sucide.

...As my Warden was constantly reminded at Lothering when he wanted to looking for his brother. Even the warden was fleeing the horde at that point. He didn't stick around Lothering to defend it either.

Its silly to blame Hawke for trying to save his family at that point. He already witnessed Loghain's betrayal and fleeing the horde himself, taking all of Lothering's defenders with him. The entire town was being evacuated.

The comparison to Redcliffe made earlier is somewhat faulty too. The people of Redcliffe couldn't flee if they wanted to. The Undead would attack them if they tried to leave during the day. They were trapped. The people of Lothering were not.

[Zjarcal]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...

Seriously though, DSC should not be taken seriously... ever.

Why not? :devil::devil:

YOU KNOW VERY WELL WHY!!!!

>

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Honestly, I don't think so. No Bioware game I played had that many choices that matter in the way you describe. I think the real problem is the entire design philosophy.

Possibly. But there are areas like it in older BioWare games. I can remember KotOR and the Progneitor on Manaan. That's pretty similar to what I'm describing. Then again, I am looking at things from a Black Isle/Troika/Obsidian philosophy. If you can't change the narrative or develop branching content, integrate consequences into gameplay, the character system and the environment as much as possible. That way, your decisions are concrete, not imaginary.

Modifié par mrcrusty, 04 août 2011 - 05:46 .

[Ryzaki]

Zjarcal wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

...DSC ends with Fereldan getting overrun by the blight.

How exactly does that prove Alistair was more than capable of uniting the lands against the Blight?

He did gather all the armies just like the warden. Hell, even Howe and Cauthrien were fighting alongisde the troops.

The only real difference between Alistair's journey and the Warden's is that because the player controls the Darkspawn the only "win" scenario is for Alistair to lose. I could let Alistair and company defeat me and then say Alistair saved Ferelden.

Seriously though, DSC should not be taken seriously... ever.

Yeah...DSC was just a mess. 
Wasn't there a mod that was pretty much the same thing? 

[jlb524]

Ryzaki wrote...

Felt like dumb luck to me. Arishok picked him because he was the only one he could tolerate...which in a city like Kirkwall isn't some giant feat. Felt like important people saw Hawke and decided to use him/her like a blundgeoning tool. A glorified errand boy. Which really wasn't that different from the Warden but at least the Warden could go FU and have chronic backstabbing disorder. Hawke doesn't even get that. 

I don't mind that. I just don't like that kind of Slice of Life story. It irritates me. Really though Marketing is to blame for a lot of this. If they had marketed the game they made and not the game they pretended to make there would've been a lot less angry people. 

Why could the Arishok tolerate her/him though?

The Warden can't always go FU either...case in point...the Dalish Warden.  I still think the most logical course of action for that individual would have been to tell Duncan 'FU' and leave after being cured of the taint....go back to the clan...not an option though. 

To be honest, I don't pay attention to marketing, so I didn't expect Hawke to be some glorious 'Warden' type figure, and I really liked Hawke as a protagonist.  

[Realmzmaster]

lady constance wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

...DSC ends with Fereldan getting overrun by the blight.

How exactly does that prove Alistair was more than capable of uniting the lands against the Blight?

Yeahh, I just watched the ending to see for myself. This only proves further that the Warden was necessary in order to defeat the Blight. Loss of faith in Dragon Age retracted.

No it proves that I as the gamer can play both sides and win.  It does not prove that the warden is needed. If Alistair was the PC like Hawke is in DA2 I could take Alistair (or any of the other companions) and win. The PC justs happens to be the warden.

[KnightofPhoenix]

mrcrusty wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Honestly, I don't think so. No Bioware game I played had that many choices that matter in the way you describe. I think the real problem is the entire design philosophy.

Possibly. Then again, I am looking at things from a Black Isle/Troika/Obsidian philosophy. If you can't change the narrative or develop branching content, integrate consequences into gameplay, the character system and the environment as much as possible. That way, your decisions are concrete, not imaginary.

Would you consider what happens to Flotsam (feast / pogrom), the different quests of Act 3 depending on path (some of which can influence the dragon's fate. There is also the Witch hunt that is shown), and the differences seen in the Loc Muinne conference, as meaningul choices?

I personally wouldn't consider them to be that significant in the game itself (though important for the game world). But consequences were still shown adequately I thought.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 04 août 2011 - 05:52 .

[Frusciante31]

mrcrusty wrote...

http://social.biowar...1768/10#8032853

You couldn't have just said that "choices have consequences"? 

You're right, I can't really think of a choice that has a meaningful consequence in DA2. 

That being said, I can't think of a choice that had a meaningful consequence in DA:O, either.  Sure, I could put a different dwarf on the throne of Orzammer, or Elf in charge of the Dalish, but did that really change anything in how the story moved forward? 

Sure, I could have killed Leliana or Zevran or Sten, but did that change anything? No, I would've just missed out on the content related to them - it didn't change the story or add any twists to how things played out. 

I guess, to me - and maybe I'm just not a RPG Purist (even though I damn sure like these games!) - there really are no meaningful choices in any games.  The trick is the suspension of disbelief in the illusion of those choices.

No matter what I do in DA:O, I am going to join the Gray Wardens, Duncan is going to die, Ostagar is going to fall,  I will assemble an army of humans, dwarves, and elves, challeng and depose Loghain, and kill the Archdemon.  Just like no matter what I do in DA:2, I am going to lose a *SPOILER, *SPOILER*, discover a red idol,  fight the qunari, and the *SPOILER* will have a huge brawl with me in the middle..

So I guess I just don't understand where the "meaningful choice" comes in - the only choices that I, personally, am concerned with are how my character reacts to the events around him and DA2 handles that just fine to me.

But, I guess we all look for different things in a game, to each his own. Thanks for helping me understand this complaint; i see it thrown around alot but I didn't really know what it meant...

Modifié par Frusciante31, 04 août 2011 - 05:52 .

[Sharn01]

lady constance wrote...

Rogue Unit wrote...

lady constance wrote...

Sepewrath wrote...

corkey sweet wrote...

i find the charcter Hawke to be very shallow and dull. he is very non-memorable. i hope bioware decides to give hawke an offscreen death before dragon age 3 comes out

I disagree, Hawke was a great character, that was fleshed out very well as opposed to the Warden who was just a blank avatar, that had no actual purpose. If you look back at the story in Origins, if you remove the Warden, it wouldn't matter in the least bit. The latter, they need to ever do again, the former, definitely needs to be more of that.

The Warden had no purpose? I don't understand. The Warden was the only one who could defeat the Archdemon at the time. All of the other Ferelden Wardens, aside from Alistair, were dead. Who else could have gathered an army to take on the Blight? Alistair? That wasn't likely. So, without the Warden, the Blight would have devastated much of the world.

The Darkspawn Chronicles showed that - in a world without the Warden - Alistair was more than capable of uniting the lands against the Blight on his own.

Oh, I see. I've never played Darkspawn Chronicles. If the Warden is indeed as useless as Hawke,  I fail to see the point in all the sacrifices they made. This sours my opinion of Origins a bit. Two useless protagonists lead me to believe the third will be equally useless.

The darkspawn chronicles cant be taken seriously, the Devs have come on the forums and actually stated that its not a true what if universe, they changed characters skills and personalities completely for the purpose of the DLC.

That being said, even if someone could do what the warden did, which already happened since 24 possible race/class/background combinations exsist, doesnt change the fact that someone had to do what the warden did.  Nobody had to do anything that Hawke did, and the main storyline still plays out the same. 

[KnightofPhoenix]

jlb524 wrote...
Why could the Arishok tolerate her/him though?

There is really no good reason for that. Why would the Arishok respect Hawke if we play him as a psychotic Qun hater (assumign we can)?

I always felt it was plothammering.

To be honest, I don't pay attention to marketing, so I didn't expect Hawke to be some glorious 'Warden' type figure, and I really liked Hawke as a protagonist. 

I paid attention to the marketing fully expecting that he wouldn't be a glorious Warden either. In fact I was counting on it.
I wasn't counting on not being able to determine anything and playing a lazy protagonist.

[Ryzaki]

Why could the Arishok tolerate her/him though?

The Warden can't always go FU either...case in point...the Dalish Warden.  I still think the most logical course of action for that individual would have been to tell Duncan 'FU' and leave after being cured of the taint....go back to the clan...not an option though. 

To be honest, I don't pay attention to marketing, so I didn't expect Hawke to be some glorious 'Warden' type figure, and I really liked Hawke as a protagonist.  

Because he/she happened to be good at killing things. 

You kind of can the Warden can leave the Wardens to go back to the clan I believe at endgame. You just have to wait until you end the blight (which for a dalish would make sense. Why risk having your clan have to move on to an unknown country due to the blight destorying the old one?). Add that to sparing the old god's spirit by doing the DR, and/or making yourself mistress to the king and that felt like enough of a FU to me. YMMV though. 

I did pay attention to marketing. Too much sadly. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 04 août 2011 - 05:54 .

[jlb524]

The Darkspawn Chronicles just gave players the option to play as a Darkspawn...oh, how cool!

I wouldn't take it seriously, no.

I never played that DLC b/c it was always a gimmick to me.

[jlb524]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

There is really no good reason for that. Why would the Arishok respect Hawke if we play him as a psychotic Qun hater (assumign we can)?

I always felt it was plothammering.

Based on what happened in Act 1?  I think the Arishok respected Hawke because he/she was at least willing to talk to him and deal with the issue instead of either hoping it would go away (Viscount) or trying to actively undermine/destroy them (Petrice).  

The Arishok isn't privy to Hawke's motivations, just his/her actions.  Hawke actually, ya know, spoke with him instead of treating him as a nuisance that needed removal.

Modifié par jlb524, 04 août 2011 - 06:01 .

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Honestly, I don't think so. No Bioware game I played had that many choices that matter in the way you describe. I think the real problem is the entire design philosophy.

Possibly. Then again, I am looking at things from a Black Isle/Troika/Obsidian philosophy. If you can't change the narrative or develop branching content, integrate consequences into gameplay, the character system and the environment as much as possible. That way, your decisions are concrete, not imaginary.

Would you consider what happens to Flotsam (feast / progrom), the different quests of Act 3 depending on path (some of which can influence the dragon's fate. There is also the Witch hunt that is shown), and the differences seen in the Loc Muinne conference, as meaningul choices?

I personally wouldn't consider them to be that significant in the game itself (though important for the game world). But consequences were still shown adequately I thought.

Yes, the former and latter change the world state and Act 3 because it's still branching content based on an earlier decision. I think that the decision in Flotsam can be a meaningful one or a pointless one depending on what kind of Geralt you're playing. But the Loc Muinne decisions are undoubtedly meaningful because they alter the world state significantly.

Frusciante31 wrote...

You couldn't have just said that "choices have consequences"?  [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/tongue.png[/smilie]

I could've, but most people see choices & consequences = epilogue slides. I had to show that it isn't the case. It is a bit long though.



Don't get me wrong. Origins didn't have much more than the epilogue slides. But that's the thing, it does have them depicting the changing state of the world, making the decisions concrete.

You're arguing for a branching narrative type deal, where the main story changes based upon your decisions. That's nice, preferred. But I'm not asking for that. I'm asking for smaller, more focused consequences for your actions. For example, the Anvil of the Void decision affects how Dwarven production goes, so maybe you get cheaper/more expensive items from Dwarven merchants based on that decision. Maybe a unique item or too if you decide to keep it.

The thing is, I'm not too fussed on a railroaded narrative, how Hawke feels "powerless" to stop the greater tragedies that (s)he goes through. I can live with that as long as the railroading isn't too obvious (Act 3 was terrible railroading though). What I do want is for the game to honor and acknowledge the choices you are given through tangible consequences. Branching narrative and content is the best solution, but not the only one. It is very important that this happen, because if I'm not even given control over a character concept (Hawke is preset), I can't feel like it is my character who is forging my own narrative, within the game's greater narrative.

Sure, people have a different variety of Hawkes that they roleplay. But I find it hard to see the roleplaying past the three tones. It comes down to the consequences making the roleplaying concrete and not imaginary, for me.

Otherwise, I don't see the difference between "roleplaying" that Hawke cares about the Ferelden refugees even if nothing happens, or "roleplaying" in Oblivion where I refuse to join the Mage's Guild because I'm a Rogue, even if there is no literal restriction - the roleplaying is not acknowledged by the game and it's all in my head.

Modifié par mrcrusty, 04 août 2011 - 06:07 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

jlb524 wrote...
Based on what happened in Act 1?  I think the Arishok respected Hawke because he/she was at least willing to talk to him and deal with the issue instead of either hoping it would go away (Viscount) or trying to actively undermine/destroy them (Petrice).  

The Arishok isn't privy to Hawke's motivations, just his/her actions.  Hawke actually, ya know, spoke with him instead of treating him as a nuisance that needed removal.

If the Arishok really respects Hawke based on the fact he does not have the pressure and responsability of governance that the Viscount has, then maybe he is starting to confuse symptoms with causes.  It becomes even weirder, imo, if Hawke is a mage.

And it's a tad bit hypocritical considering that the Arishok himself never cared to really talk to the Viscount (until at the end of act 2), and kept lying for 3 years.

Frankly, I would have vastly preferred being able to side with the Arishok or Petrice at the beginning of Act 2 based on choices in Act 1. It would have felt less like plothammering and more Hawke earning respect through his choices (as opposed to just given to him because a quest forced him to talk to the Arishok).

[lady constance]

Realmzmaster wrote...

lady constance wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

...DSC ends with Fereldan getting overrun by the blight.

How exactly does that prove Alistair was more than capable of uniting the lands against the Blight?

Yeahh, I just watched the ending to see for myself. This only proves further that the Warden was necessary in order to defeat the Blight. Loss of faith in Dragon Age retracted.

No it proves that I as the gamer can play both sides and win.  It does not prove that the warden is needed. If Alistair was the PC like Hawke is in DA2 I could take Alistair (or any of the other companions) and win. The PC justs happens to be the warden.

That's a ridiculous argument. It's like saying "I could be given Spongebob Sqaurepants and still win because he's the protagonist of the story and that's how video games work!" Well, guess what? Spongebob isn't the protagonist and neither is Alistair. And it's made that way for a reason. In Origins, within the story, within the lore, within the Dragon Age universe, the Warden is needed to defeat the Blight.

[jlb524]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

If the Arishok really respects Hawke based on the fact he does not have the pressure and responsability of governance that the Viscount has, then maybe he is starting to confuse symptoms with causes.  It becomes even weirder, imo, if Hawke is a mage.

I don't think we can assume that the Arishok would have the same expectations of those that govern that we would have.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

And it's a tad bit hypocritical considering that the Arishok himself never cared to really talk to the Viscount (until at the end of act 2), and kept lying for 3 years.

The Qun didn't demand it.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Frankly, I would have vastly preferred being able to side with the Arishok or Petrice at the beginning of Act 2 based on choices in Act 1. It would have felt less like plothammering and more Hawke earning respect through his choices (as opposed to just given to him because a quest forced him to talk to the Arishok).

I actually agree that Hawke should have had more options here.  Though, it probably would have ended with the same mess.  I have yet to play an Aggressive Hawke and side with Petrice, but that's my currently planned playthrough...I'm curious to see the differences (if any).

[Thor Rand Al]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

Frusciante31 wrote...

Which, to me, further implies that Hawke will be the protagonist in DA3 -

No.

They would further increase the probability of losing a customer.

Wait  you mean they didn't already lose a customer with the way you keep dissing DA2?  Did you or did you not buy the DLC Legacy?  If not then tech they already lost a customer.  N I hope to see Hawke in DA3,   

But anyways I'm goin bk to DA2 and play some more of Hawke n companions, cause this same hate n discontent 4 months later, even after Legacy is just old.

[lady constance]

jlb524 wrote...

I don't think Hawke was buffeted by the winds of fate.  S/he did things to gain influence in Act 1 which led to her being trusted in Act 2 by both the Viscount and the Arishok.  This is the reason that s/he was thrown into the qunari conflict at the end of that act and the reason why s/he was the one to stop the Arishok and gain the title of 'Champion'.  It wasn't on pure dumb luck. 

I would say it was definitely due to dumb luck. Hawke is lucky enough to have an uncle with connections - connections that get her into Kirkwall and get him/her noticed. Hawke gets even more lucky when she runs into a dwarf willing to take a chance on her, depite his brother's objections. If Varric had not encouraged Hawke, found a Warden in possession of maps, I highly doubt they would have been a part of the excavation at all.

[jlb524]

lady constance wrote...

jlb524 wrote...

I don't think Hawke was buffeted by the winds of fate.  S/he did things to gain influence in Act 1 which led to her being trusted in Act 2 by both the Viscount and the Arishok.  This is the reason that s/he was thrown into the qunari conflict at the end of that act and the reason why s/he was the one to stop the Arishok and gain the title of 'Champion'.  It wasn't on pure dumb luck. 

I would say it was definitely due to dumb luck. Hawke is lucky enough to have an uncle with connections - connections that get her into Kirkwall and get him/her noticed. Hawke gets even more lucky when she runs into a dwarf willing to take a chance on her, depite his brother's objections. If Varric had not encouraged Hawke, found a Warden in possession of maps, I highly doubt they would have been a part of the excavation at all.

That is luck...but is anything that happened afterwards luck?  Also, Varric helped Hawke b/c of the things she/he did in the past year....it wasn't complete luck.

Modifié par jlb524, 04 août 2011 - 06:22 .

[lady constance]

Thor Rand Al wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

Frusciante31 wrote...

Which, to me, further implies that Hawke will be the protagonist in DA3 -

No.

They would further increase the probability of losing a customer.

Wait  you mean they didn't already lose a customer with the way you keep dissing DA2?  Did you or did you not buy the DLC Legacy?  If not then tech they already lost a customer.  N I hope to see Hawke in DA3,   

But anyways I'm goin bk to DA2 and play some more of Hawke n companions, cause this same hate n discontent 4 months later, even after Legacy is just old.

I don't like Dragon Age 2, but I plan on planning Dragon age 3...unless Hawke is the protagonist. I don't understand why people bother coming to BSN if you don't want to see some of the complaints people have on DA2. Do you expect to come here and see everyone praising it? How dull would that be? I may not like it, but I have no issues conversing with those that do.

[KnightofPhoenix]

jlb524 wrote...
I don't think we can assume that the Arishok would have the same expectations of those that govern that we would have.

I think it's safe to assume that he at least knows that one who governs has more responsability and pressures than one who does not (at least I hope).

The Qun didn't demand it.

You bring up an interesting point. Maybe it's just me, but on a lot of occasions, I felt the Arishok was making up what the Qun demands from his ass. This is evident when you have some Qunari freaking out at you being a mage or even hearing a Sarebaas speak, but then the Arishok decides that the Qun doesn't demand he put you down like all mages. Because the Qun (plot) demands it.

Sten was ambiguous, but I felt consistent. The Arishok was just...well just there. I realized that much of my original fascination with him was really for the most part the cool and intimidating VO.
A missed opportunity imo.

I actually agree that Hawke should have had more options here.  Though, it probably would have ended with the same mess.  I have yet to play an Aggressive Hawke and side with Petrice, but that's my currently planned playthrough...I'm curious to see the differences (if any).

I think some variation with the same mess could have been done. For instance, if Hawke tried to side with the Qunari, maybe they can send him a gift in Act 3 (or maybe ask his help on some quest). Maybe he would be seen as a compromiser like the Viscount, which could alienate some and attract others.
If he sides with Petrice, he might attract more radical members of the Chantry and nobles who want a stronger leader...etc.

Consequences shown and felt that do not need to change the overall plot.

Of course I would have preferred if the qunari were not there in the first place.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 04 août 2011 - 06:27 .

[cmessaz]

Aeowyn wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

Aeowyn wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

Frusciante31 wrote...

1.  Hawke is trying to protect his mother and siblings by getting them to Kirkwall where they are safe from the Blight.

So she gets them to Gwaren, puts them on a ship and waves goodbye.  Did you see those schmucks in Redcliffe leaving their families behind to go fight?  Why couldn't we have played one of them?

You obviously are not an elder sibling, or have never been forced to be responsible of a family member or you wouldn't even have made that suggestion.

And yes, where exactly would Hawke leave to fight? Since they flee Lothering shortly after Ostagar, there is no army to join against the Blight.

Soldiers do it all the time and have done throughout history.  I'm sure they're not all younger siblings.

You stay to fight the Blight, and since it's stipulated that Hawke and Aveline are both anti-Loghain, to fight him.  If they had stuck around a little while, they'd have heard that Bannorn were rebelling and could have joined in.

It's fine if you didn't care about that.  I'm saying this is what makes Hawke a loser in my book from word one.

And since when is Hawke a trained soldier? Aveline was one, but Hawke wasn't. Besides, if Hawke stayed so would Carver, and that leaves Mum and Bethany to fend for themselves.
Family was the bigger value in this story, not heroism and personal glory.

I'm sorry Addai, but your reasoning for Hawke being a loser is a pretty bad reason. Obviously you want a Warden 2.0.

Gonna have to go with Aeowyn on this one .....O_o. YEAH I'm gonna go back and fight the entire horde mkay? So...maybe my warden should have stayed in Lothering too and made a stand against the horde! Cuz apparently the warden was THAT awesome.

Also throwing my vote in for Hawke in DA3, or a new protagonist for what it's worth. In this thread it probably means nothing but...there it is. My warden had her ending, leave it be please. And no I don't want a Warden 2.0. It amazes me how people are so unwilling to see past their Warden to enjoy a new game. It also amazes me how people dis a character THEY basically define...but whatever. Have fun bashing while I play video games and await Skyrim.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Thor Rand Al wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

They would further increase the probability of losing a customer.

Wait  you mean they didn't already lose a customer with the way you keep dissing DA2?  Did you or did you not buy the DLC Legacy?  If not then tech they already lost a customer.  N I hope to see Hawke in DA3,   

"Dissing"?

Anyways, no they lost a customer for anything DA2 related, for I see no point in buying anything with its name on it if I can't bring myself to play the game again.

However, my interest in the DA franchise, while lessened by quite a bit, is not annihilated. So I am still a potential customer. DA3 having Hawke as protagonist, would reduce my interest even more however.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 04 août 2011 - 06:28 .