539 réponses à ce sujet

[Spell Singer]

The ending in NWN2 went over like a lead ballon for much the same reasons. But a part of the issue people may have with DA2 is that at the start of the game much is made of Hawke's involvement in the crisis of the moment but it eventually turns out Hawke wasn't really that critical. Take Hawke out of the picture and some events in Kirkwall would have happened anyway. I would also think that while failure can be an outcome, you had better prepare people for the fact they are the lead actor in a tragedy before hand. The difference between expectation (you are playing the chosen one) and the reality would otherwise cause rage ohne ende. In ME2 telling people that Shep could die and team mates could die meant that when it happened you could accept it. Loosing half the crew of the normandy and Mordin wasn't fun but it adds something to that play through that my more successful ones lack.

Also the expectation on how the game was marketed contributes. I never felt I rose to power at all. If becoming champion had led to an event like you get in ME when you become a spectre the title might have meaning but given how it doesn't even get you a discount at the local tailors...

But from a GM's point of view, if the players are going to fail I'd at least try to make it clear their failure is a part of something longer term. So market DA2 as "experience the tragic beginining of events that will change Thedas forever through the eyes the man blamed unjustly for it all." Then people have a much better idea what they are buying into. Hell hath no fury like expectations scorned.

[Anarya]

Xewaka wrote...

Anarya wrote...
I've noticed. I need to stop rolling my eyes or I might get a sprain. An eye sprain.

And re:story-- DA2's story was really much darker than Origins', hands down. And more mature as well. There's a theme of failure despite your best efforts and intentions, of realizing the limits of your control over your fate and the world, and coming to terms with that. That's a very mature thing to realize and deal with, and really was my favorite aspect of the story. I can't think of another game off the top of my head that deals with that, whereas I can think of a million where I save the world from the looming evil fill-in-the-blank. Not that the story was perfect, but it had some great things going for it.

However, it is hard for a videogame to make the main protagonist fail despite his/her best efforts without making the player feel as if he/she (the player) failed as well. It's a very fine line to walk, and for some people they fell off said line.
I salute what they attempted to do with the story. It was a refreshing change of pace from the usual true and tried paths trodden a thousand times before. I personally liked the idea behind it, even if it sometimes failed to communicate properly due to the game's execution. However, I also understand that for some people, ineffectual character = ineffectual player, and thus the undercurring theme is lost in the frustration of being unable to derive any sort of result from their (the players') effort.

Yes, it is a challenge, and there's lots of people who are never going to like a game with a story like that for whatever reason. I wish more games would take a little more risk with story but I understand why they don't. I do wonder what the reception to the story would have been like if the other faults had been ironed out though.

[Deadmuskrat]

 This whole concept of the artstyle being changed to appease casual gamers or hardcore gamers is a very silly debate. To even come up with such a conclusion is such a confirmation bias.

Look at anything, whether it be a movie, TV, book, comic, etc series, the art and the world get more defined as time goes on. To put it in simple terms, DA:O was a rough sketch of the world of Thedas. The world was more realized by the writers than it was visually by the artist who actually had to work with more constraints. As time goes on, the world will get further distictive and fleshed out to what the writers originally envisioned. For example, some people are complaining about the Emissaries and their new look. This is the product of trying to move further towards how the lore depicts Emissaries (Elven Broodmothers) rather than having them look like hurlocks with silly hats.

I'm not sure if it's because I am in the art field, but there was a ton of things that I loved about the further distictions they put in place. The Elves and Qunari were a welcomed sight. I hated the fact that Elves were just shorter humans in DA:O. I think one of my favorite examples of further defining the world was the Chantry and Templars. All the props such as book designs really helped me immerse further into the lore of this world.

That's all i really have to say though. It irks me to think that some people are so short-sighted as to actually believe that the refinement in the design was strictly a grab for Casual players rather then look at it objectively.

Modifié par Deadmuskrat, 02 septembre 2011 - 10:03 .

[Spell Singer]

Anarya wrote...

I wish more games would take a little more risk with story but I understand why they don't. I do wonder what the reception to the story would have been like if the other faults had been ironed out though.

Planescape: Torment, NWN2, Bloodlines, Alpha Protocol, ME 2 are all examples of cases where the story is different then "normal" and in the first two cases the players actions don't affect the ending.  Even Mask of the Betrayer actually took a huge risk...the mechanic of the souleater caused...significant player rage.  One could note that most of these games were by Black Isle Studios and its successors and that all of these games lacked commercial sucess outside of ME2 and it was(is) heavily critized for everything under the sun despite having commercial sucess.

People's reactions are pretty much in proportion to their expectations and the degree they are fulfilled so I am not sure what you are wondering about?  Just because someone likes the art style in DA2 isn't going to change if they feel let down by the ending, it is far more likely that if they feel let down by the ending it will magnify their quibbles with other aspects...so the art style suddenly goes from "borderline acceptable" to "derived from Lord of the Rings/cartoony/insert other term."

[Anarya]

Spell Singer wrote...

Anarya wrote...

I wish more games would take a little more risk with story but I understand why they don't. I do wonder what the reception to the story would have been like if the other faults had been ironed out though.

Planescape: Torment, NWN2, Bloodlines, Alpha Protocol, ME 2 are all examples of cases where the story is different then "normal" and in the first two cases the players actions don't affect the ending.  Even Mask of the Betrayer actually took a huge risk...the mechanic of the souleater caused...significant player rage.  One could note that most of these games were by Black Isle Studios and its successors and that all of these games lacked commercial sucess outside of ME2 and it was(is) heavily critized for everything under the sun despite having commercial sucess.

People's reactions are pretty much in proportion to their expectations and the degree they are fulfilled so I am not sure what you are wondering about?  Just because someone likes the art style in DA2 isn't going to change if they feel let down by the ending, it is far more likely that if they feel let down by the ending it will magnify their quibbles with other aspects...so the art style suddenly goes from "borderline acceptable" to "derived from Lord of the Rings/cartoony/insert other term."

I meant the other flaws in the story, not the game on the whole. I wonder if the story was properly paced, did not feel directionless in the first half, had a satisfactory amount of reactivity, etc., would the theme of futility have been acceptable to the majority?

Modifié par Anarya, 02 septembre 2011 - 10:18 .

[Spell Singer]

Anarya wrote...

I meant the other flaws in the story, not the game on the whole.

At the end of the day people are going to rate things based on their own scale of importance but if they are dissapointed in the main plot, an interesting secondary plot or well done side character will not affect their over all view of the work at its basic level, in my experience at any rate.  They will say "I didn't like it even though...was good"  which is different admitted than "It was the organic biproducts found on the south side of a northward proceeding male bovine."  But only by degree.

Edit: seeing your edited response let me add.  "Theme of futility" is not correct.  The story is told with a specific premise...the events in the gallows happened, and at least three specific events happened that preceeded that.  Those two points have to be kept in mind because those things are the fixed plot of the story.  So it is not futility but inevitability.  Some things must happen, you can't change those things because the story...the real story happened in the past.  The problem is that player experiences it as the present.  It is like watching a murder mystery that starts off with the murder and then goes back in time to show the events leading to it...nothing the people do can stop the murder from happening.  It is that whole watching a train wreck happening in slow motion feeling.

What you change is a lot of the whys around the events themselves.  Maybe the seeker suddenly sees Hawke as a romanic person who risks all to save his love for example at the end of act 2.  But the story is only futile if you view the ending as changeable when it most clearly is not.  If you (Hawke) could have peacefully resolved the situation in the gallows that fateful day Cassandra and Verric would not be having their little chat in your house.  That they are having it means it happened but the real question is why...and that is what you as the player influence.  

Modifié par Spell Singer, 02 septembre 2011 - 10:48 .

[Anarya]

Spell Singer wrote...

Anarya wrote...

I meant the other flaws in the story, not the game on the whole.

At the end of the day people are going to rate things based on their own scale of importance but if they are dissapointed in the main plot, an interesting secondary plot or well done side character will not affect their over all view of the work at its basic level, in my experience at any rate.  They will say "I didn't like it even though...was good"  which is different admitted than "It was the organic biproducts found on the south side of a northward proceeding male bovine."  But only by degree.

But that was my question. Would they BE disappointed in the main plot if it were executed flawlessly? Or is a story dealing with failure and futility always going to be unacceptable to a percentage of players by its very nature?

[Spell Singer]

Anarya wrote...

But that was my question. Would they BE disappointed in the main plot if it were executed flawlessly? Or is a story dealing with failure and futility always going to be unacceptable to a percentage of players by its very nature?

See above.  It isn't failure and flutility at all.  The events happened in the past from the point of view of the story's present...the present is Cassandra and Varric in your house in Kirkwall a year or so after the events in the Gallows...the past is what happened in the game.  You aren't a time travelling hawke going back to fix the events so you don't fail if the events occured as the Maker willed it.

In my view the problem is that the actual game isn't what it is marketed to be.  The story has nothing to do with your rise to power*, and less to do with fighting like a spartan and thinking like a general or whatever that catch phrase was.  Would people be less dissapointed in the story if they actually bought the game expecting what they got?

*admittedly you start off as a pennyless refugee and end up champion of kirkwall but the game goes to great lengths to isolate you from "power" (unlimited or otherwise) and even the codex entry on Champion-hood makes it seem nothing to get excited about.  But ok you do rise in society through the game.

Modifié par Spell Singer, 02 septembre 2011 - 11:03 .

[Wulfram]

Failure shouldn't mean that none of your choices matter. At the least you should be able to fail in different ways, with different consequences.

Unlike DA2, which seemed to take a perverse delight in showing how all your choices are utterly irrelevant.

[Spell Singer]

Wulfram wrote...

Failure shouldn't mean that none of your choices matter. At the least you should be able to fail in different ways, with different consequences.

Unlike DA2, which seemed to take a perverse delight in showing how all your choices are utterly irrelevant.

If you could change what happened that day in the gallows then you would cause Cassandra and Verric to not be having a discussion over what you did.  It happened what Verric is explaining is why it happened.  There is no fail.

[Wulfram]

Spell Singer wrote...

If you could change what happened that day in the gallows then you would cause Cassandra and Verric to not be having a discussion over what you did.  It happened what Verric is explaining is why it happened.  There is no fail.

All that the Varric/Cassandra conversation requires is that Hawke was involved in something which led to the rebellion of the circles.  There's lots of variation available.  But the game goes to great length to make clear that nothing Hawke did mattered, and that the world is exactly the same whatever they chose.

As it is, it's hard to understand why Cassandra is interested in a minor failure such as Hawke.

[Sylvianus]

In Exile wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...
But in general, when Bioware told me its dark story with DAO, about the blight, Ferelden, etc etc, , I believed it, I was thrilled because what it told to me was followed by what I saw.

I didn't see a dark story in DA:O. I saw an incredibly light story about a superhuman character who single-handedly defeats a horror in the fastest possible time (6 mo. instead of 20 years) without almost any devastation (one city sacked, really?) and while succeeding in gather an unprecedented interspecies army that collaborated without any strife or even mention of racial tension, largely to defend a land that wasn't their own.

You can go so far as to have fairy tale endings for all of the main plot areas, save sort of Ozrammar. 

DA:O was high fantasy.

Why not improve instead of just throwing all the design for cartoon ?

That doesn't address my original point: I am saying DA:O was no less cartoony. You haven't actually told me what about DA:O made it not cartoony. Not the game, the art style.

I posted a pic with the witcher, because when I see that, I can already think that the story is dark enought, even if I don't know it. The design affects me.

You did post a pic with the Witcher. Let me counter with these:

%3Ca%20href=http://greywardens.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/rsz_2hawkedragon.jpg" alt=""/>

%3Ca%20href=http://images.wikia.com/dragonage/images/0/0e/Destruction_Chantry.jpg" alt=""/>

Not hard to cherry-pick a few dark shots of a game. 

1- But that's your opinions,  not mine, whether agree or disagree. It  serves no purposes here. I don't see the point to discuss about it. And I disagree with your point about dao = light. The story told isn't light, not at all,  super character or not, sucess or not. That's not what make a story dark enough or not, in any case in my eyes .

2- But I don't care your original point, It was YOUR opinion, not a fact,  I didn't feel the need to discuss about it. I just answered to your comment, which already answered to my comment between what is said and what is shown, and why I was satisfied with dao. And again, I don't care that all look humans, it could be totally improved  with a new design in this art style, besides that's not what make them truly cartoonish too.  Let us agree to disagree, that's what was my thoughts. Dao was less cartoony, yes, totally in my eyes.

3 - I can't see your pics.

4 - Don't even bother to try to convince me that DA2 was no less cartoonish. You'll fail whatever what you say.  I have eyes. And the others too. This kind of visual denial won't find echo here, among us. At this point I'm not interested to talk with someone who can say me that.  It would be like telling us, what you see isn't what you see.

Yes Zelda Wind Waker is no less cartoonish than Zelda Ocarina of Time. Your eyes are wrong ...

//www.legendra.com/media/screenshots/n64/the_legend_of_zelda__ocarina_of_time/the_legend_of_zelda__ocarina_of_time_screen_11.jpg

Nintendo 64

//download.gameblog.fr/images/jeux/2609/Zelda_WindWaker_Editeur_003.jpg

Wind waker, gamecube.

Yeaaaah , wind waker is no less cartoonish.....

Modifié par Sylvianus, 02 septembre 2011 - 01:57 .

[Spell Singer]

Wulfram wrote...

Spell Singer wrote...

If you could change what happened that day in the gallows then you would cause Cassandra and Verric to not be having a discussion over what you did.  It happened what Verric is explaining is why it happened.  There is no fail.

All that the Varric/Cassandra conversation requires is that Hawke was involved in something which led to the rebellion of the circles.  There's lots of variation available.  But the game goes to great length to make clear that nothing Hawke did mattered, and that the world is exactly the same whatever they chose.

As it is, it's hard to understand why Cassandra is interested in a minor failure such as Hawke.

I don't understand why Cassandra is interested in Hawke either, except that she thinks he could be useful to solve the problem somehow.

As this is a spoiler free forum it is pretty hard to comment on multiple paths to the same point in detail.  At the end of that day in the gallows, Kirkwall gains a new tourist attraction, experiences significant defacement of historical sculptury and starts a revolt by thedas's circles.   That is fixed.  That is what Cassandra and Verric have been discussing...so what options do you see to go from "boom" to there?  I've always supported Orsino at that point but I would imagine if you don't then who you fight might change but nothing much else does.

To me this comes down to expectations, and how much they are fulfilled.   But there are a great many choices you make which have consiquences in the game, personal and otherwise.  The only thing you can't change is your date with the gallows courtyard and the outcome of that.  I don't see what happens there on that fateful day as a failure of the player nor do I see it as a failure by Hawke.  It was utterly clear by the way the game starts that the outcome is known.  What matters is the journey there and I made lots of decisions that affected the journey in the game.  It only become futile when you start with the assumption that you can avert that train wreck from happening.

[Sylvianus]

Yeah, dragon age 2 was no less cartoonish, what a joke. Thanks to make me laugh.

Please, stop take people for fools, * rolling eyes * or then you're just blind. * sigh *

Modifié par Sylvianus, 02 septembre 2011 - 12:05 .

[Wulfram]

Imagine you are visiting Kirkwall at the same time Cassandra is? What difference would you find depending on the different choices Hawke can make? I honestly can't think of any.

And Hawke fails utterly. Unless they're a total bastard who wants to screw up the world and get loads of people killed, I guess.

edit: Sylvianus, neither of those look more or less cartoonish to me.  The DA2 version looks uglier, but that's not the same thing.  And they didn't set the game up for Elvish Character Creation.  And making a decent looking female elf warden is pretty tough in Origins, anyway.

Modifié par Wulfram, 02 septembre 2011 - 12:09 .

[Spell Singer]

Wulfram wrote...

Imagine you are visiting Kirkwall at the same time Cassandra is? What difference would you find depending on the different choices Hawke can make? I honestly can't think of any.

And Hawke fails utterly. Unless they're a total bastard who wants to screw up the world and get loads of people killed, I guess.

edit: Sylvianus, neither of those look more or less cartoonish to me.  The DA2 version looks uglier, but that's not the same thing.  And they didn't set the game up for Elvish Character Creation.  And making a decent looking female elf warden is pretty tough in Origins, anyway.

Ok I conceed.  Nothing you do in the game matters at all.  Its off topic so before a mod jumps in on it, back to art critism.

Female Elf Warden:  more than decent looking in my bias view...see my screenshot list...hmmm will this work...
http://social.biowar.../34383/4851286. apparently my forum fu is improving...nope false assumption on my part...
Let me try...
<a href='http://social.bioware.com//uploads_user/35000/34383/4851286.'><img src='http://social.biowar.../34383/4851286.' border='0'></a>
if this cursed share this option doesn't work you can just look at photo 27 of my screenshot folder...

Modifié par Spell Singer, 02 septembre 2011 - 12:37 .

[alex90c]

Sylvianus wrote...

Yeah, dragon age 2 was no less cartoonish, what a joke. Thanks to make me laugh.

Please, stop take people for fools, * rolling eyes * or then you're just blind. * sigh *

Oh God what the hell is that thing on the right.

[Sylvianus]

No, no, no, no please. Don't take people for fools.

Please, that you say me, the new art style is better I can understand, that you say me, this art style for you is more distinctive, I don't care, that's your priorites and your opinions, not mine, but I can understand, but to say me, that no one is less cartoonish than the other, you lost me,  so ridiculous.

And not a chance I listen to you When my eyes see what they see.  After the words cosplays, and distinctive, the defense of this art style  seems more and more blind, and wobbly. Dao is may be a bit cartoonish, but they went too far with DA2, too much, it's too much, we see the difference. Yes Dao is by far less cartoonish. You won't convince anyone who don't like this art style because it's too cartonnish. I tell you guys, don't bother.


//images2.fanpop.com/image/photos/10400000/Morrigan-dragon-age-origins-10440626-468-642.jpg

//www.dragonagenexus.com/downloads/images/2657-3-1302605415.png

//images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090910150504/dragonage/images/c/cb/Leliana.JPG
//greywardens.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/rsz_leliana_2.jpg

//tatianacaldwell.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/Zevran1.jpg

//images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110312054242/dragonage/images/archive/9/9e/20110331154306%21ZevranDA2.jpg


//www.likertland.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/dragon-age-hawk.jpg

//media.giantbomb.com/uploads/3/30014/1261692-anders7_super.jpg

//www.xtra.ca/BinaryContent/stories/10/24/10246/web/S1_DragonAge-Anders.jpg.jpg

//images.wikia.com/dragonage/images/e/ed/Nathaniel_portrait.PNG

//i831.photobucket.com/albums/zz238/ELE08_photo/Dragon%20Age%20II/6cbb7c93.jpg

//admintell.napco.com/ee/images/uploads/gamertell/Oghren_Dragon_Age_640_thumb.jpg

//blog.fileplanet.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Dalls-Oghren-Screen-1.jpg

//media.giantbomb.com/uploads/3/30014/1711303-varric_super.jpg

//gaminghud.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/varric-dragon-age-2.jpg

//media.giantbomb.com/uploads/0/3661/1731510-dragonage2_2011_03_10_17_53_31_05_super.jpg

//images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110405161308/dragonage/images/f/fa/Fenris_close.PNG

//2.bp.blogspot.com/-m2UXU6Ktb5g/TXp-mkzzhKI/AAAAAAAAOtk/GXvPbQTsoO0/s400/sten.jpg

//images.wikia.com/dragonage/images/9/98/Arishok03.png

Modifié par Sylvianus, 02 septembre 2011 - 12:44 .

[Wulfram]

Perhaps I don't watch the right cartoons, but I've not seen any which look even vaguely like DA2

[erynnar]

Wulfram wrote...

Perhaps I don't watch the right cartoons, but I've not seen any which look even vaguely like DA2

Cartoon-ish doesn't mean exactly like a cartoon. Don't play that game. I didn't watch cartoons that looked exactly like WoW either, but it's style is more "cartoon" than real. And you know that is what people mean when they say DA2 is "cartoony."

Modifié par erynnar, 02 septembre 2011 - 12:51 .

[Sylvianus]

alex90c wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...

Yeah, dragon age 2 was no less cartoonish, what a joke. Thanks to make me laugh.

Please, stop take people for fools, * rolling eyes * or then you're just blind. * sigh *

Oh God what the hell is that thing on the right.

Sorry, I didn't want to scare you, but it was for the good of humanity.

[alex90c]

Firstly, I actually have a burning hatred of this guy. A WANNAH BE A DURRRRGON

Secondly, I actually could imagine that scene being from a cartoon. Y'know how the characters look all cartoony but the backgrounds are all painted in shows like Avatar: TLA?

[Sylvianus]

erynnar wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Perhaps I don't watch the right cartoons, but I've not seen any which look even vaguely like DA2

Cartoon-ish doesn't mean exactly like a cartoon. Don't play that game. I didn't watch cartoons that looked exactly like WoW either, but it's style is more "cartoon" than real. And you know that is what people mean when they say DA2 is "cartoony."

They know very well what the community means with their complaints and ( Bioware too ).  They just play with words. But it has no interest, since everyone knows exactly what it is all about.

[Spell Singer]

Some modern anime films would come close Wulfram, but really I don't see much difference between DA 2 and DA:O myself. It is splitting hairs to me. Some aspects of the art I like in both games and some aspects I don't like in both games but overall I would find it hard to state a preference I like both to me it is just a change.

[Wulfram]

erynnar wrote...

Cartoon-ish doesn't mean exactly like a cartoon. Don't play that game. I didn't watch cartoons that looked exactly like WoW either, but it's style is more "cartoon" than real. And you know that is what people mean when they say DA2 is "cartoony."

Cartoonish doesn't mean "exactly like a cartoon".  But it does mean "like a cartoon".  And Dragon Age 2 doesn't look anything like a cartoon.

The larger eyes of the elves could be considered a cartoonish trait, I suppose.  But with nothing else, I don't really see it.