115 réponses à ce sujet

[Daithin]

Ugh.  Sorry.

Modifié par Daithin, 09 août 2011 - 05:41 .

[LobselVith8]

Vormaerin wrote...

I guess I just find it funny that people go into a Bioware game expecting a sandbox. They've never made a sandbox game as far as I am aware (I haven't played the Star Wars games, but I don't think they are different in this regard).. All the "choices" are illusory if you use the definitions provided by naysayers in this thread. There are no choices in the BG series that change the plot more than "take the left corridor" or "take the right corridor". The NWN campaigns are at least as linear as the Dragon Age ones, with even fewer meaningful decisions.

I think some people (like me) were expecting that Laidlaw was serious when he addressed they were working on the issues that were problems, like the issue of the narrative and the significance of choice, and every developer who said that Legacy was taking a long time because they were handling these issues in the DLC. Of course, it's my fault if I trusted them, since Dragon Age 2 was another example of Bioware outright lying to us about Hawke's story being a "rise to power" where our actions would "shape Kirkwall."

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

The Witcher 2 gave 2 paths to reach a similar (albeit not identical) conclusion. Something that to my knowledge has not been done by any recent RPG, and blows everything Bioware did when it comes to choices out of the water. Can't talk about Legacy of course.
And for the choices that do not change the game, they have consequences that are shown. A city can end up in a festival, or in a pogrom, that you actually see and are not told about.

Having watched vids of Cory, I am dissapointed that we can't talk with him. Why not make him like the Architect? Why not give us a choice to not fight him? I mean he survives anyways, so why force the same old "big bad evil" boss fight on us?

That's what I find interesting about the Fallout series - the protagonist can actually talk to the antagonist and resolve the situation without using his fists against the Big Bad. As for the fight with Corypheus, it becomes rather pointless since he jumps into the surviving Warden's body, and with Larius pretty much verbally hits Hawke over the head with the fact that he actually survived (it's only with Janeka that the body swap seems more subtle).

[Ariella]

The major issue I have with this whole Corphyus possession idea is that Janeka wouldn't have survived if Corphyus possessed her. And having read the Calling, I remember how Bregen was once he got out from under the influence of the Architect... So had no issue with Larius' change, and GW Bethany DID say to Larius that she didn't think that Wardens were supposed to come back from their callings. His response is "I have to try". Why say this when there's a definitive chance this Grey Warden is going to report back, and find out if Larius has spoken to the Commander.

Also if Corphyus' spirit/soul or whatever is still around, wouldn't the Calling still be sensed by a Grey Warden, like say Anders (who I had in my party as well)

[whykikyouwhy]

"Rise to power" and "shape Kirkwall" are really vague statements at best. There is implication in both, but there is plenty of room for interpretation. Did Hawke rise to power? Yes. Hawke's station in life changes from refugee to noble/champion. Did Hawke shapre Kirkwall? Yes. Hawke affected the lives of numerous individuals as well as became a figure in the mage/templar conflict.

*How* hawke rose to power and how Hawke shaped Kirkwall is really the issue for most people, I would wager.

[LobselVith8]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

That the player cannot choose to make him say what he does that ends up making him proactive does not diminish the fact that he is indeed being proactive.

The player can never chose to get Hawke to actually say what they intended - that's the dialogue wheel for you - chose a particular line of dialogue, and hear something compeletely different than what you chose for the protagonist to say. As for being proactive, the story doesn't allow us to be proactive with Hawke - he has already embarked on this venture, it's set in stone, and none of our choices throughout the narrative really matter because it leads to the same linear destination. I don't see a proactive protagonist in Legacy, I see the same problems in Legacy that existed in Dragon Age 2. The lack of any significant choices, and the protagonist who is reacting to the murder attempts made against him.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

DLC cannot address a choice made just yet. There won't be anything earth shattering regarding the nature of who you sided with, but that doesn't mean that there won't ever be.

As I said, Avernus was the same way. The Warden has no idea how much longer he'll live. For all we knew, he could've croaked the minute we left the Keep. It wasn't until DA2 that we realized that choice has some major significance.

With Avernus, The Warden makes the choice to encourage or discourage his method of experimentation. You don't see the immediate result, but you're making a leap of faith either way. It's a choice that the protagonist gets to make, and at least it provides a different result depending on what you do.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Where he wants to find out why the Carta has been attacking him. He says "I want to find out why they're attacking me".

When he finds out about Corypheus, he then says in banter "I want to find out just who this Corypheus is", and this is well before he was trapped in the prison.

Because Corypheus has been sending dwarves to kill him (in a roundabout way). I'm still waiting for a proactive and intelligent Hawke, and I think I finally see that it's never going to happen.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Lob, they're crazed carta dwarves who drunk Darkspawn blood. It's kinda hard for Hawke to talk to someone who's not only a ghoul but attacks Hawke on sight. There are also mindless Darkspawn. Hard to talk to them, as well as Profane and demons. Again, it's hard to talk to those groups.

I'm not addressing the carta members, but when Corypheus takes over Larius and does everything but hand Hawke the script to the story in revealing that he's still alive and in the Warden's body. It's so unsubtle with Larius that it makes the protagonist look like an idiot when he does absolutely nothing - which seems to be what he does best, given that he does nothing throughout Dragon Age 2.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Be this some dream I wake from? Am I in dwarven lands? Why seem their roads so empty? --- Corypheus

He feels the seals weaken. He knows you are close by. You must be ready...---Larius

The Golden City. The first violation. The magisters who brought the Blight.


Rewatching the scenes, there are some instances where possessed Larius speaks that keep to the odd manner of speech of Corypheus. But very few. However, Larius was lucid prior to the possession.

I watched the conclusion, and I couldn't believe Hawke was foolish enough to drop the entire matter based on Larius' say so. Just like when he did nothing about his discovery of white lilies, just like when he never investigated what happened to Leandra, just like when he stood idly by and did nothing about Meredith becoming a dictator for three entire years, Hawke does nothing. I'm tired of it.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

The accents were different. Larius' voice is different from Corypheus', so there was no difference when Hawke spoke to Larius before and after.

Now, I enjoy Corypheus. As he doesn't know what's happened, I'm wondering if he'll try to learn more about the world he is now in. Maybe he'll be harmless. Maybe he won't. I'm glad he'll still play a part. I wouldn't want Hawke to succeed at killing him.

Why not? It makes the battle against Corpheus completely pointless. It's another instance of the protagonist having no choice in the matter.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

And while I don't agree that it would've fit in perfectly, it would've been nice to attack him afterwards for roleplaying purposes of a Hawke that's suspicious of everything that deals with that place and fail anyway.

And what would've fit is to have Hawke write a letter to the Wardens. Or talk about it with Carver/Bethany if they're a Warden.

One thing that bugs me is people say Hawke only kills, and then they say "He should've killed this person". I don't get it.

Because people want Hawke to use his brain and have some agency. It's no different than thinking he should have killed Petrice when he had the chance - all the murders that transpired are directly Hawke's fault for not putting her out of her misery. Corpheus is a threat, just like Petrice - he shouldn't be ignored, he should be dealt with. It's like the quote you have in your signature - it tells me that you think Hawke should do nothing instead of something. Why be proactive when he can ignore the problem entirely, like he usually does?

[TEWR]

The player can never chose to get Hawke to actually say what they intended - that's the dialogue wheel for you - chose a particular line of dialogue, and hear something compeletely different than what you chose for the protagonist to say. As for being proactive, the story doesn't allow us to be proactive with Hawke - he has already embarked on this venture, it's set in stone, and none of our choices throughout the narrative really matter because it leads to the same linear destination. I don't see a proactive protagonist in Legacy, I see the same problems in Legacy that existed in Dragon Age 2. The lack of any significant choices, and the protagonist who is reacting to the murder attempts made against him.

This has nothing to do with the dialogue wheel and the player choosing something different. This happens in banter with the party. It happened with my party of Mage Hawke, Anders, Varric, and Warden Carver. Full party banter.

With Avernus, The Warden makes the choice to encourage or discourage his method of experimentation. You don't see the immediate result, but you're making a leap of faith either way. It's a choice that the protagonist gets to make, and at least it provides a different result depending on what you do.

It's a leap of faith yes, but you don't see the ramifications of it until DA2, which is much later in terms of the timeline. The Warden can't see what the different result is when he makes that choice. He can't go back and talk to Avernus to see if he found out anything new regarding the taint, or why Wardens are even needed to end the Blight. And that's the thing. DLC doesn't provide anything earth shattering until later.

Before saying Hawke's choices don't matter, wait to see what happens.

Because Corypheus has been sending dwarves to kill him (in a roundabout way). I'm still waiting for a proactive and intelligent Hawke, and I think I finally see that it's never going to happen.

You do know that Hawke has the option to leave due to the statue? He can head back to Kirkwall well after finding out and do nothing else, so it's almost as if he's satisfied with finding out why they were attacking him.

"Corypheus? Psh who cares."

I'd call that a truly reactive, lazy, and idiotic Hawke. Which is why the banter is key. Wanting to find out who Corypheus is means he wants to find out everything. Why his father was so important, why Corypheus is targeting him. This isn't reacting. It's being proactive.

I'm not addressing the carta members, but when Corypheus takes over Larius and does everything but hand Hawke the script to the story in revealing that he's still alive and in the Warden's body. It's so unsubtle with Larius that it makes the protagonist look like an idiot when he does absolutely nothing - which seems to be what he does best, given that he does nothing throughout Dragon Age 2.

you had originally said

Hawke is killing his enemies - that's pretty much all Dragon Age 2 was about.

I pointed out that he had to kill those enemies because they weren't exactly people he could talk to. Hawke is focused on killing Corypheus. He doesn't see anything. He doesn't see the convulsions or anything else. He doesn't know anything about Darkspawn, and how much his sibling knows is unknown. Hawke sure as hell doesn't know anything about Archdemon swapping. Even if he did though, there's nothing to indicate that a Darkspawn could do something because it's an Archdemon only trick as far as people know.

Hell, if you did it in Act 1 there wouldn't be any reason to take issue with it because neither Hawke nor his sibling know anything about Darkspawn beyond "they need to be put down". There has never been an instance of an Awakened Darkspawn swapping bodies. The only people to do this are Corypheus (which is obvious to the player) and Flemeth.

Now, had there been a scene where Hawke was told by Larius that when the Wardens first tried to kill him he possessed a nearby Darkspawn and morphed it into his appearance, then there would be something wrong with Hawke's accepting the explanation at face value.

Why not? It makes the battle against Corpheus completely pointless. It's another instance of the protagonist having no choice in the matter.

Because Corypheus has far-reaching consequences. Here's what I hope to happen, as I said on page three:

I am glad that Corypheus isn't dead personally. I liked his VA, and I'm hoping they have him maybe morph who he possessed back into his appearance that we saw him as and give him his old voice back.

Or have him jump to a regular Darkspawn, morph the Darkspawn back to his appearance that we saw, give him his original VA, and the Warden we sided with has some sort of significance. Like in the codex that says when Wardens were taken away from Corypheus, they remembered nothing about being near him. Maybe have the same thing happen to Larius/Janeka, only they don't remember anything from when they were possessed.


For all we know, if this is indeed the case that will happen, the Wardens won't believe Larius because he's a ghoul but they'll believe Janeka. Maybe Larius will tell them of Hawke. Maybe Hawke will have sent them a letter. Maybe Hawke will have done something off screen.

We don't know. Corypheus is important.

That said, I would've definitely liked to talk to him and let him go free because I like his voice. And Malcolm's. I hope we can see a picture of Malcolm Hawke sometime in the future. I imagine he has a really epic beard.

Because people want Hawke to use his brain and have some agency. It's no different than thinking he should have killed Petrice when he had the chance - all the murders that transpired are directly Hawke's fault for not putting her out of her misery. Corpheus is a threat, just like Petrice - he shouldn't be ignored, he should be dealt with. It's like the quote you have in your signature - it tells me that you think Hawke should do nothing instead of something. Why be proactive when he can ignore the problem entirely, like he usually does?

You can't blame Hawke for Petrice. He has no idea that Petrice will overstep her bounds and abuse the grand cleric's seal in the future, or that she'll murder Saemus.

http://social.biowar...index/8013896/3

the problem was with the but-thou-must that Bioware did. It was incredibly poor. Blaming Hawke for not killing Petrice is like blaming the Warden for not killing Loghain. Loghain obviously didn't like Cailan or the Wardens and said "Yes Cailan, a glorious moment for us all" in a sinister tone. It was clear what he was going to do.

Hell it's like blaming Maric for not killing Loghain when Flemeth said "Dude's gonna stab you in the back repeatedly."

Saying Hawke should've killed Larius but then saying all Hawke does is kill is odd imo.

but we're obviously not going to agree, so let's at least agree to disagree shall we?

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 09 août 2011 - 07:17 .

[D.Sharrah]

Lob...

You keep using the Avernus example of seeing choice effect story in game, but you do not see that affect until DA 2...by the same logic shouldn't we wait until DA 3 (or further DLC) before we judge whether or not "Hawke's choices" have any effect?

You have to remember that while we are actively participating in the story...ultimately the developer's have a very specific direction that wand the universe to go. Think of it as the base argument in the "Time Machine"...the reason the inventor can not change the past is the fact that those events are what lead him to create the machine, with the impetus he never creates the machine and can not change the past...or in other words things were going to go to h-e-double hockey sticks in Kirkwall no matter what Hawke did...

[D.Sharrah]

Ehteral...

Great post.

[TEWR]

And that messere is why I'm here. *bows*

[Pygmalin]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Having recently purchased and finished Legacy, I have to say I'm disappointed that, once again, choice doesn't seem to matter. Regardless of who Hawke sides with, it's the same conclusion - the darkspawn seems to have possessed the surviving Grey Warden, and Hawke isn't capable of realizing this as a possibility, probably for the same reason he didn't do anything about Meredith becoming a dictator for three years in the city-state he was living in. Is there a reason that Mike Laidlaw mentioned that there was an issue about the significance of choice in Dragon Age 2, that they were going to rectify those issues, and then we were providing with a DLC where choice, once again, didn't matter?

Did you get an advance copy of DA3? Just curious, because really how do you know what choice is going to effect what outcome. I get your point at this time the choice seems rather un-important. Either way there is a grey warden walking around with a magister's soul, but what we don't know is how it will effect the Wardens or for that matter what Cory's intentions are based on your choice.  Don't get me wrong, DA2's choices left me feeling like why the heck did I bother getting this game.  But I honestly have to say I loved Legacy, un-important choice and all. 

[LobselVith8]

D, I don't keep pointing to it. It's merely an example of a choice that isn't virtually the same result no matter what you do, which is the point. No matter who Hawke sides with in Legacy, the two thousand year old darkspawn inhabits a Grey Warden. It becomes pointless, really, since all Hawke accomplished is the release of a potentially dangerous threat to civilization. All I see is a defense of linear storytelling, especially from the argument that "Hawke being reactive is really him being proactive."

Pygmalin, what does Dragon Age 3 have to do with the failings of Dragon Age 2 and the DLC that makes the same mistakes in terms of insignificant choices and a linear narrative? Having a choice between two people that leads to virtually the same conclusion is the same problem I had with the choice at the end of Dragon Age 2.

[Anyroad2]

LobselVith8 wrote...

D, I don't keep pointing to it. It's merely an example of a choice that isn't virtually the same result no matter what you do, which is the point. No matter who Hawke sides with in Legacy, the two thousand year old darkspawn inhabits a Grey Warden. It becomes pointless, really, since all Hawke accomplished is the release of a potentially dangerous threat to civilization. All I see is a defense of linear storytelling, especially from the argument that "Hawke being reactive is really him being proactive."

I personally dont see a huge problem with a somewhat linear story.

Linearity in a game like Dragon Age is something that needs to be there to some extent to allow the writers to create a more meaningful story. If every facet of Dragon Age 2 had game changing choices, we'd all wind up with very diffrent endings... and the writers would either have to Retcon our Choices (something that I feel no one wants) for a new game, or not have one game affect another at all, making the choices pretty pointless.

What happens at the end of Legacy is linear like people have said, Corpheus will (if were right in assuming that) swap bodies with a Grey Warden no matter who you side with. You cant choose to kill all the Wardens. You cant complete Legacy without beating Corpheus. No matter what you do, the end result will basically be the same. I imagine that this is done because the events in Legacy will have a purpose beyond its origin, and given the importance of what happend Id wager its purpose will be pretty significant overall. The reason why the linear path of Legacy is, is for our benfit down the road. Thats why I feel that some things being linear is important. I dont know about anyone else here, but I'd be pretty upset if Corpheus plays a major role in an upcomming installment of Dragon Age if I had fully dealt with him in Legacy. I'd be missing out on something major.

[Pygmalin]

LobselVith8 wrote...


Pygmalin, what does Dragon Age 3 have to do with the failings of Dragon Age 2 and the DLC that makes the same mistakes in terms of insignificant choices and a linear narrative? Having a choice between two people that leads to virtually the same conclusion is the same problem I had with the choice at the end of Dragon Age 2.

I get your point that the choices lead to the same outcome with slightly different dialog, I do, really, but my point is that we wont know the Overall effect our choice will have later in the series.  I guess I am trying to give the game the benefit of the doubt, and holding out that our choices will matter later, even though we didn't see it in this particular game. 

My biggest issue with the "story" of this game, was not the choices, but the story contridictions. Maybe that is choice related, but without spoilers, being able to walk up to a random Templar and use Blood magic with no consequence. Does bug the crud out of me.  I was hoping for a stint in the Gallows with a Harrowing or something as a mage. Consequences that would fit. 

[modeseven]

D.Sharrah wrote...

You know what amazes me is that Bioware has stated numerous times when "discussing choice in games" that it is more of an illusion of choice that they provide...after all they are trying to tell a narrative and it does have to complete a story arc...

The same thing happens in every "Choose Your Own Adventure" book - there are fixed outcomes, the difference lies in how you get there.

I find it hard to believe with the level of intelligent discussion that happens on this forum, that people still get stuck on this. For crying out loud, Bioware is giving us a wonderful opportunity to participate in their story! But it is THEIR story.

Preach.

[Harcken]

To be honest I like some DLC's and plot threads not having completely different outcomes. It allows Bioware to take an interesting story thread and expand it in future installments. Whereas, if the conclusion of legacy had 7 different endings, it most likely would have been mentioned in a DA3 tavern or never heard of again.

[ourimaler]

I'll admit, I thought Legacy was disappointing for the same reasons as the rest of DA2: Our choices mean nothing in the end, Hawke fails yet again, and the bad guy wins. That's just...not interesting gaming material, as far as I'm concerned.