223 réponses à ce sujet

[Anarya]

Addai67 wrote...

Anarya wrote...

This, exactly. Maybe people define "dark, mature" stories differently than I do, but a "hero" story in which the hero ultimately can't really save the day, even if s/he succeeds? That's pretty dark.

This gets a bit subjective and thus useless, but IMO the clowny, exaggerated aspect of DA2 works against its goal of telling a dark, mature story. 

It is pretty subjective. I disagree and did not find DA2 "clowny". Exaggerated, yes, especially when compared to Origins, but I didn't feel any kind of conflict between the tone of the story and how the game looked and played.

[hoorayforicecream]

Brockololly wrote...

The issue is that most choices either ended in the same outcome no matter what and often weren't terribly convincing at even giving the illusion of meaningful choice or the choices involved the companions, so if you didn't give a crap about the companions, it doesn't really feel important. And then all the companions minus the LI end up drifting off according to Varric anyway.

Did you read the article? This is how they outlined the types of choices a player gets to make:

1. Flavor choices: "You're asking the player to make a choice, but either there is no 'real' effect, or it's immediate." (e.g. choosing whether to accept the quest to look for the runaway wife in Act 1) 
2. Local choices: "You see a repercussion after the choice is made, but it's confined to the plot or the region the choice occurs in." (e.g. Choosing what happens after escorting Ketojan to the coast and running into the Qunari there)
3. Choices that "matter": The ones that you're talking about, like siding with Branka or Carridin, the Werewolves or the Elves, giving Isabela to the Qunari, or siding with the Templars/Mages. 

It seems you're saying that only type 3 matters, but that's not necessarily the case to everyone. Types 1 and 2 provide opportunities for one to role play a character instead of merely an avatar, and I think that's a good thing. 

[alex90c]

4. telling Petrice no and still having to do the quest

herpderp

[upsettingshorts]

alex90c wrote...

4. telling Petrice no and still having to do the quest

herpderp

That is the clumsiest but-thou-must I can recall in any game. 

There had to have been a more clever way to force us into that one. 

I mean, I treat the mainplot quests as matters of history - Hawke did do them, and we as players don't get to decide otherwise - because the game takes place in the past tense.  But there should have been a better reason for a hesitant Hawke to have to go through with it other than the player him or herself realizing it was a but-thou-must.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 01 août 2011 - 11:38 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

I don't see why DA2 couldn't have all three kinds (or have them on a more equitable level), when ME1 and Origins had all three.
This whole "choices in DA2 are personal" is nothing new and was in both games that I mention.

[Cutlass Jack]

Well every game has 'choices' that you can't turn down. Its useless to complain about them.

"Join the Wardens."
"No."
"Welcome to Ostagar!"

[TEWR]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

alex90c wrote...

4. telling Petrice no and still having to do the quest

herpderp

That is the clumsiest but-thou-must I can recall in any game. 

There had to have been a more clever way to force us into that one. 

I mean, I treat the mainplot quests as matters of history - Hawke did do them, and we as players don't get to decide otherwise - because the game takes place in the past tense.  But there should have been a better reason for a hesitant Hawke to have to go through with it other than the player him or herself realizing it was a but-thou-must.

Petrice could've threatened to expose your mageness or your sister's mageness.

Cutlass Jack wrote...

Well every game has 'choices' that you can't turn down. Its useless to complain about them.

"Join the Wardens."
"No."
"Welcome to Ostagar!"

Welcome to Camp Ostagar! Sit around the campfire with Darkspawn and eat delicious hot schmoes smores!



Anyway, that was easily excused because of the Right of Conscription. It was the "You must save Ferelden" that was a choice you couldn't turn down that wasn't done well enough

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 01 août 2011 - 11:43 .

[upsettingshorts]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

Well every game has 'choices' that you can't turn down. Its useless to complain about them.

"Join the Wardens."
"No."
"Welcome to Ostagar!"

And they justify them better than the Ketojan quest.

Even if they have to resort to the Rite of Conscription or blackmailing you. 

The most that happens with that quest is - I believe, I never let it get that far - Varric reminding you that you should go check on that rumor.  Even if you've got a ton of gold and are ready to join the expedition.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Petrice could've threatened to expose your mageness or your sister's mageness.

Yup, woulda worked just fine. 

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 01 août 2011 - 11:41 .

[erynnar]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

Well every game has 'choices' that you can't turn down. Its useless to complain about them.

"Join the Wardens."
"No."
"Welcome to Ostagar!"

Jack you made me laugh so hard. But I don't wanna go to Ostagar! *stamps feet and pouts*

[erynnar]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

alex90c wrote...

4. telling Petrice no and still having to do the quest

herpderp

That is the clumsiest but-thou-must I can recall in any game. 

There had to have been a more clever way to force us into that one. 

I mean, I treat the mainplot quests as matters of history - Hawke did do them, and we as players don't get to decide otherwise - because the game takes place in the past tense.  But there should have been a better reason for a hesitant Hawke to have to go through with it other than the player him or herself realizing it was a but-thou-must.

Petrice could've threatened to expose your mageness or your sister's mageness.

Now that would have been cool. Made me hate her more...and I didn't think I could like her less. Nope, I can!

[Cutlass Jack]

erynnar wrote...

Cutlass Jack wrote...

Well every game has 'choices' that you can't turn down. Its useless to complain about them.

"Join the Wardens."
"No."
"Welcome to Ostagar!"

Jack you made me laugh so hard. But I don't wanna go to Ostagar! *stamps feet and pouts*

Heh I'm pretty sure that's exactly what I said Ery. In that same whiny voice Seinfeld used when saying "But I don't wanna be a pirate!"

[KnightofPhoenix]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Petrice could've threatened to expose your mageness or your sister's mageness.

Yup, woulda worked just fine. 

That would have raised the question as to how she knows, but no one else knows, not even some Templars.

[hoorayforicecream]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I don't see why DA2 couldn't have all three kinds (or have them on a more equitable level), when ME1 and Origins had all three.
This whole "choices in DA2 are personal" is nothing new and was in both games that I mention.

Probably because they require different amounts of effort to make work.

[Mr.House]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

Well every game has 'choices' that you can't turn down. Its useless to complain about them.

"Join the Wardens."
"No."
"Welcome to Ostagar!"

But it's so boring in Ostagar

[Mr.House]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I don't see why DA2 couldn't have all three kinds (or have them on a more equitable level), when ME1 and Origins had all three.
This whole "choices in DA2 are personal" is nothing new and was in both games that I mention.

Those games also had longer dev times, DA2 had a very short one.

[TEWR]

It would've been nice to meet one Chantry priest and one Templar who knew before Hawke started saving the city from Qunari.

[upsettingshorts]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

That would have raised the question as to how she knows, but no one else knows, not even some Templars.

I've had a longer discussion on that potential angle with Xewaka and others before.

The gist is that she'd know about the bribes that the Mercenaries/Smugglers were offering to Templars to keep you/sibling under the radar - or at least, away from the Circle - and either simply not be under that influence, or threaten to expose it to superiors who wouldn't be swayed by such sums.

It would have to change the nature of Petrice's pitch - that she thinks you're just some anonymous disposable lowtown **** really wouldn't fly with the blackmail angle - but that's not the important part of the quest.  The important part is the fact she's setting you up to try and provoke the Qunari.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 01 août 2011 - 11:47 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Mr.House wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I don't see why DA2 couldn't have all three kinds (or have them on a more equitable level), when ME1 and Origins had all three.
This whole "choices in DA2 are personal" is nothing new and was in both games that I mention.

Those games also had longer dev times, DA2 had a very short one.

Indeed, that's a large part of the problem.


@ upsettingshorts
Makes sense.

Honestly, I don't mind the bad railroading in that quest (because it's one of my favorites, barring the herp derp Qunari at the end). What I do mind is the game forcing us to help the Qunari (or Dumar) throughout Act 2, until the end when they finally give us a choice, but it's implemented with a bad logic.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 01 août 2011 - 11:49 .

[TEWR]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

That would have raised the question as to how she knows, but no one else knows, not even some Templars.

I've had a longer discussion on that potential angle with Xewaka and others before.

The gist is that she'd know about the bribes that the Mercenaries/Smugglers were offering to Templars to keep you/sibling under the radar - or at least, away from the Circle - and either simply not be under that influence, or threaten to expose it to superiors who wouldn't be swayed by such sums.

It would have to change the nature of Petrice's pitch - that she thinks you're just some anonymous disposable lowtown **** really wouldn't fly with the blackmail angle - but that's not the important part of the quest.  The important part is the fact she's setting you up to try and provoke the Qunari.

She could think she was knocking out two birds with one stone. If you're a mage, than she thinks you won't survive anyway (but keeps it to herself until the quest is over) so the world is rid of one more mage. If Bethany is in your party, she thinks the same thing for her.

If she isn't, then she thinks that when you turn up dead (because she's confident you will) she exposes Bethany's mageness anyway.

I dunno. I guess that could work.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 01 août 2011 - 11:53 .

[Ryzaki]

That would make the inability to kill her despite threatening to do so even more of a wallbanger. :/

[Brockololly]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Brockololly wrote...

The issue is that most choices either ended in the same outcome no matter what and often weren't terribly convincing at even giving the illusion of meaningful choice or the choices involved the companions, so if you didn't give a crap about the companions, it doesn't really feel important. And then all the companions minus the LI end up drifting off according to Varric anyway.

Did you read the article? This is how they outlined the types of choices a player gets to make:

1. Flavor choices: "You're asking the player to make a choice, but either there is no 'real' effect, or it's immediate." (e.g. choosing whether to accept the quest to look for the runaway wife in Act 1) 
2. Local choices: "You see a repercussion after the choice is made, but it's confined to the plot or the region the choice occurs in." (e.g. Choosing what happens after escorting Ketojan to the coast and running into the Qunari there)
3. Choices that "matter": The ones that you're talking about, like siding with Branka or Carridin, the Werewolves or the Elves, giving Isabela to the Qunari, or siding with the Templars/Mages. 

It seems you're saying that only type 3 matters, but that's not necessarily the case to everyone. Types 1 and 2 provide opportunities for one to role play a character instead of merely an avatar, and I think that's a good thing. 

I think you need a balance of those 3 types and IMO, DA2 was practically devoid of Choices That "Matter", even if they were only in giving the illusion of a meaningful choice/consequence. Even in the ones you mention- give Isabela to the Qunari? Varric says about 5 minutes later she escapes and nothing changes beyond that except you no longer have her in your party. Side with Templars/Mages? You get a different epilogue slide (barely). I'm not saying DAO did a much better job with those type of choices, but I think it did a better job in making them seem more meaningful.

And really, I think given how the Framed narrative was played up, people expected far more Choice That Matter but also Consequences That Matter, something BioWare has almost never done.

My personal problem with DA2's Flavor type choices or more RP dialogue type choices like Shorts mentioned last page is that for me, its next to pointless given the voice and paraphrases obfuscating the dialogue and it kills any nuance I'd prefer in trying to build a PC through dialogue choices. At least in Origins you had more of the Choices That Matter to actually act on the PC's personal world view.

Modifié par Brockololly, 02 août 2011 - 12:03 .

[erynnar]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

erynnar wrote...

Cutlass Jack wrote...

Well every game has 'choices' that you can't turn down. Its useless to complain about them.

"Join the Wardens."
"No."
"Welcome to Ostagar!"

Jack you made me laugh so hard. But I don't wanna go to Ostagar! *stamps feet and pouts*

Heh I'm pretty sure that's exactly what I said Ery. In that same whiny voice Seinfeld used when saying "But I don't wanna be a pirate!"

ROFL! That's the voice I imagined the line delivered in!

[upsettingshorts]

Ryzaki wrote...

That would make the inability to kill her despite threatening to do so even more of a wallbanger. :/

Easy, add more Templar bodyguards.  Make fighting her there look like it would be absolute suicide.  Heck, even allow you to fight but make it a situation like in ME2's Arrival DLC where you literally cannot win.  Or throw in a line about how she will have Leandra killed if you get really uppity and there you go.  Any of these scenarios would be preferable to a clumsy but-thou-must.

She'd almost be approaching Duncan-during-the-human-noble-origin levels of ruthlessness by that point.  Almost.

Brockololly wrote...

My personal problem with DA2's Flavor type choices or more RP dialogue type choices like Shorts mentioned last page is that for me, its next to pointless given the voice and paraphrases obfuscating the dialogue and it kills any nuance I'd prefer in trying to build a PC through dialogue choices.

And for me, the voice is key to the very same thing.

Insert my usual spiel about 3rd and 1st person playstyles not being compatible, yada yada yada.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 02 août 2011 - 12:02 .

[TEWR]

Ryzaki wrote...

That would make the inability to kill her despite threatening to do so even more of a wallbanger. :/

true. But that would probably draw suspicion from the Chantry. A priest and a Templar are murdered, and rumors were flying around that she was seeking out help for a task? The chantry would no doubt investigate to find the culprit.

Plus, it could easily be explained with her saying that if Hawke did kill her, the Chantry would look through her personal things and find evidence of Hawke's/Bethany's mageness that the Chantry would use to apprehend Bethany/Hawke (which would be a lie, but Hawke doesn't know that)

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 02 août 2011 - 12:02 .

[erynnar]

Brockololly wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Brockololly wrote...

The issue is that most choices either ended in the same outcome no matter what and often weren't terribly convincing at even giving the illusion of meaningful choice or the choices involved the companions, so if you didn't give a crap about the companions, it doesn't really feel important. And then all the companions minus the LI end up drifting off according to Varric anyway.

Did you read the article? This is how they outlined the types of choices a player gets to make:

1. Flavor choices: "You're asking the player to make a choice, but either there is no 'real' effect, or it's immediate." (e.g. choosing whether to accept the quest to look for the runaway wife in Act 1) 
2. Local choices: "You see a repercussion after the choice is made, but it's confined to the plot or the region the choice occurs in." (e.g. Choosing what happens after escorting Ketojan to the coast and running into the Qunari there)
3. Choices that "matter": The ones that you're talking about, like siding with Branka or Carridin, the Werewolves or the Elves, giving Isabela to the Qunari, or siding with the Templars/Mages. 

It seems you're saying that only type 3 matters, but that's not necessarily the case to everyone. Types 1 and 2 provide opportunities for one to role play a character instead of merely an avatar, and I think that's a good thing. 

I think you need a balance of those 3 types and IMO, DA2 was practically devoid of Choices That "Matter", even if they were only in giving the illusion of a meaningful choice/consequence. Even in the ones you mention- give Isabela to the Qunari? Varric says about 5 minutes later she escapes and nothing changes beyond that except you no longer have her in your party. Side with Templars/Mages? You get a different epilogue slide (barely). I'm not saying DAO did a much better job with those type of choices, but I think it did a better job in making them seem more meaningful.

My personal problem with DA2's Flavor type choices or more RP dialogue type choices like Shorts mentioned last page is that for me, its next to pointless given the voice and paraphrases obfuscating the dialogue and it kills any nuance I'd prefer in trying to build a PC through dialogue choices. At least in Origins you had more of the Choices That Matter to actually act on the PC's personal world view.

DAO gave me more an illusion that they mattered and a sense of urgency or agency (werewolves or elves).  But I didnt' feel that with DA2. I didn't fret over the decision to save the mages or turn them in. Or let Anders kill the girl or not.  But why didn't I? The choices didn't matter any more, really than me siding with the elves or the werewolves, but it felt more urgent or important.