122 réponses à ce sujet

[AlexXIV]

jlb524 wrote...

Leon481 wrote...

Every sidequest Hawke took had him making proactive decisions that directly affected the fates of people in Kirkwall. They weren't necessarily world altering decisions, but they were still count.

That's not as cool and flashy as like, savin' the world from an ancient evil!

Especially if you save dozens, kill hundrets and fail to prevent a war in which thousands will perish.

[DrFumb1ezX]

AlexXIV wrote...

jlb524 wrote...

Leon481 wrote...

Every sidequest Hawke took had him making proactive decisions that directly affected the fates of people in Kirkwall. They weren't necessarily world altering decisions, but they were still count.

That's not as cool and flashy as like, savin' the world from an ancient evil!

Especially if you save dozens, kill hundrets and fail to prevent a war in which thousands will perish.

Maybe that's the reason. People didn't get to save the world in this game. In fact, they probably helped **** it up. 

[Morroian]

Leon481 wrote...

Hawke wasn't entirely passive. Consider that his choices directly affected the fates of his companions. His choices directly affect the fate of the living sibling, more than once in Bethany's case. He chooses whether Aveline gets married or not. He chooses whether Isabella gets taken away, saved, or just runs off, not to mention if she gets a ship or not. He chooses to save Fenris or hand him over to be a slave. His decisions either make Anders a determined terrorist or a certified lunatic. His choices affect whether Merrill gives up blood magic and the mirror or continues her obsession. He chooses Varric's fate by deciding whether he kills Bartrand or not as well as whether he keeps the idol fragment. Let's not forget he directly chose the fates of Orana, Feynriel, and so many others.

Every sidequest Hawke took had him making proactive decisions that directly affected the fates of people in Kirkwall. They weren't necessarily world altering decisions, but they were still count.

Exactly, although they don't affect the narrative. And with the narrative I'd actually argue Hawke is pro-active with the Qunari in Act 2 as much as any protagonist in an rpg is. Hawke is trying to help the situation, we may not have any choices to make but Hawke's is involved.  

[mousestalker]

In most fanfic, Hawke is usually a top, except when Anders or Fenris are in play. If we use fanfic as the expression of the player's subconscious, then Hawke is hardly the passive player some here have claimed.

[Heather Cline]

I feel that the game could have been written better and executed better. Like yeah killing Petrice after the whole Qunari incident and heading it off at the pass. With her dead in dark town it would be hard as hell to figure out who did it if at all. Taking down Meredith before she becomes a pain in the ass also should have been an option and so on and so forth.

Hawke wasn't dimwitted or reactive. The game itself just wasn't executed properly. Again this can be attributed to the game being rushed, and the story not being fully fleshed out and the gameplay mechanics not fully implemented as it should have been.

Do I want to see Hawke more proactive in the game and future DLC's? Yes I would love to. Will it happen? Not likely.

[Leon481]

Either way, we'll have to wait until DA3 or a good expansion to see how important Hawke's choices really were. How they handle the consequences of the DA2 choices then are what's going to decide whether Hawke's time in Kirkwall was wasted or not. With the big cliffhanger ending, that's the only way we're going to see the results of our choices. They need to follow through with this properly for the sake of their fans, their reputation, and most importantly, the sake of the integrity of the storyline.

Modifié par Leon481, 16 septembre 2011 - 02:46 .

[Addai]

mousestalker wrote...

In most fanfic, Hawke is usually a top, except when Anders or Fenris are in play. If we use fanfic as the expression of the player's subconscious, then Hawke is hardly the passive player some here have claimed.

If we go by most fanfic, everything with a pulse is shtupping everything else in every conceivable direction.  This is hardly a criterion.

[Addai]

jlb524 wrote...

Leon481 wrote...

Every sidequest Hawke took had him making proactive decisions that directly affected the fates of people in Kirkwall. They weren't necessarily world altering decisions, but they were still count.

That's not as cool and flashy as like, savin' the world from an ancient evil!

Like watching out for the Fereldans at that mine?  Telling Petrice to go stuff herself, or your decision to free/ turn over Ketojan?

@Leon481:  You shouldn't have to pay for more content to see the end of the story.  DA2 was supposed to be a full game, not a prequel to an expansion.

Modifié par Addai67, 16 septembre 2011 - 03:20 .

[mousestalker]

Addai67 wrote...

mousestalker wrote...

In most fanfic, Hawke is usually a top, except when Anders or Fenris are in play. If we use fanfic as the expression of the player's subconscious, then Hawke is hardly the passive player some here have claimed.

If we go by most fanfic, everything with a pulse is shtupping everything else in every conceivable direction.  This is hardly a criterion.

I'm not following your objection here. You present a reality based comment, then follow it with an objection.

[TEWR]

Heather Cline wrote...

I feel that the game could have been written better and executed better. Like yeah killing Petrice after the whole Qunari incident and heading it off at the pass. With her dead in dark town it would be hard as hell to figure out who did it if at all. Taking down Meredith before she becomes a pain in the ass also should have been an option and so on and so forth.

Hawke wasn't dimwitted or reactive. The game itself just wasn't executed properly. Again this can be attributed to the game being rushed, and the story not being fully fleshed out and the gameplay mechanics not fully implemented as it should have been.

Do I want to see Hawke more proactive in the game and future DLC's? Yes I would love to. Will it happen? Not likely.

If Hawke -- or any protagonist for that matter -- was able to kill someone to avert a disaster in the plot, the game would be incredibly boring. Imagine if I was able to kill Loghain on my first playthrough when I realized he was going to do something horrible when he said "Yes Cailan, a glorious moment for us all".

The problem isn't that Hawke can't kill Petrice. It's that he isn't given an incentive to be unable to kill Petrice. Had Petrice said she would expose Hawke's mageness/Bethany's mageness to the Templars, then Hawke would be forced to side with her. She could say that she has heard whispers of Hawke's name from his/her time with Athenril/Meeran from her contacts among the Faithful, who lived in Darktown/Lowtown. Hawke wouldn't be a notorious person, but Hawke would be known a little bit by then. It wouldn't be enough to deter her however, because this actually works out better for her. She could say that the Faithful are all over Lowtown and Darktown at all times of the day, and that some are around her hovel (which would be why she chose that hovel). If Hawke killed her, they would see him/her walking out and would report him to the Templars.

Basically, she would blackmail Hawke and Hawke would be forced to comply. You need to be given a good reason for a but-thou-must.

edit: ehhh.... the Qunari one wouldn't work unless it happened at the end of the quest where Hawke threatens to kill her, if Hawke didn't try to refuse to do the quest upon finding out about Ketojan.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 16 septembre 2011 - 03:55 .

[phaonica]

There is a difference between a player's ability to be proactive, and a character being proactive. Movies, books, and video games have had proactive characters in them without a player choice mechanic.

Having a choice and making a decision does not automatically mean one is proactive. If you are given an ultimatum and make a choice, that is not proactive.

As AlexXIV said, being a catalyst does not automatically mean one is proactive. Finding the Red Lyrium might be a catalyst for a conflict, and Hawke may have been the only person in Thedas who was in the right place at the right time for this conflict to be catalyzed, but s/he still only stumbled across it. Not proactive.

I'm not saying that Hawke never displays any proactivity at all. Earning money for the expedition, seeking jobs, working to get the mansion back, helping Merrill with the mirror--these are proactive things. But I feel that Hawke's displays of proactivity are completely overpowered by displays of reactivity regarding the Qunari and Mage/Templar conflicts.

I think the idea of having joinable Factions in the game has a lot of potential. That way you can pick out a goal that your character wants to achieve, join the faction who shares that goal, and then play out various quests, stories, and events that are all about furthering that goal. Despite being somewhat of a contrived mechanic, I think having factions could allow players like me to feel more proactively involved in the main conflicts while also controlling the vast potential goals that players might choose (which would help out the development team).

[Leon481]

Addai67 wrote...
@Leon481:  You shouldn't have to pay for more content to see the end of the story.  DA2 was supposed to be a full game, not a prequel to an expansion.

The first thing is, I was talking about long reaching consequences of DA2 choices which potentially lead to another story entirely. The consequences of those choices don't need to affect Hawke's story. They also don't have to be a main focus. You may just encounter a person Hawke saved as a quest giver. Maybe you encounter Feynriel in Tevinter, or Orana moved to Orlais with Bodhan and Sandal, or that elven girl Hawke saved from the molester became a knight. None of this is relevant to Hawke's story, but it would still be nice to see. These are all things that could be included in an expansion or even DA3 without interfering with the plot of either game but still wrapping things up as a bonus. These are all things that would succeed in making Hawke's time in Kirkwall seem worthwhile and give his choices more weight.

Modifié par Leon481, 16 septembre 2011 - 07:58 .

[AlexXIV]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

If Hawke -- or any protagonist for that matter -- was able to kill someone to avert a disaster in the plot, the game would be incredibly boring.

That's what Addai said just a bit up in this thread. Just because the plot makes Hawke lame, doesn't mean that he's not. It's a rather lame excuse to say well the story demanded that Hawke can't change certain things. Then it was not a proper story for a hero type character in an RPG, period. I have made the Mass Effect comparision before. Shepard is not stopping the Reaper invasion in ME2, but he is still not failing every mission.

Hawke is like a character in the prologue of an RPG in which it is explained how things go wrong so that then the hero can step in and put things right. Hawke himself fails to do so. I think a classical hero is defined by two things. First, to be an outstanding being, and second to be in the right place at the right time. Hawke was actually an outstanding person, but he was in the wrong place at the wrong time to change anything. Which makes him a heroic personality, but not the actual hero that saves the day. At least not for the player, since we as player know more than for example the common folk who maybe never even met Hawke in person. We know that Kirkwall may have been better off if Hawke had perished in the Blight (assuming that the expedition would never have brought the idol back, and Meredith wouldn't have been driven insane by it then). And that's not helping the case either.

And I think people are fooling themselves if they think that optional side quests will have far reaching consequences for the next game. I mean give me examples where it happend from DA:O to DA2 or ME to ME2.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 16 septembre 2011 - 08:37 .

[Cutlasskiwi]

Collider wrote...

I very much liked that Hawke wasn't the arbiter of everything unlike other Bioware protagonists.

I agree. It's one of the things that appealed the most to me about Hawke. S/he felt like a real person that got caught in a bad situation and tried to make the best of it. I hope that BioWare continues with this. The fact that I could play a Hawke that fails added a lot of enjoyment to me.

[_- Songlian -]

Yellow Words wrote...

Collider wrote...

I very much liked that Hawke wasn't the arbiter of everything unlike other Bioware protagonists.

I agree. It's one of the things that appealed the most to me about Hawke. S/he felt like a real person that got caught in a bad situation and tried to make the best of it. I hope that BioWare continues with this. The fact that I could play a Hawke that fails added a lot of enjoyment to me.

I also have to agree with this. Imo it was one of the (few) strengths of the game.

I guess it all comes down to what you want to play in a game. Do you want your hero to be 'the chosen one' type that stands in the middle of the storm, or do you want a more subtle approach to your 'saving kittens and kicking ass' adventures? The second variant worked much better for me, and I'd like to see more of it in the future.  (Just coupled with a stronger background story, tho.)

[TEWR]

AlexXIV wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

If Hawke -- or any protagonist for that matter -- was able to kill someone to avert a disaster in the plot, the game would be incredibly boring.

That's what Addai said just a bit up in this thread. Just because the plot makes Hawke lame, doesn't mean that he's not. It's a rather lame excuse to say well the story demanded that Hawke can't change certain things. Then it was not a proper story for a hero type character in an RPG, period. I have made the Mass Effect comparision before. Shepard is not stopping the Reaper invasion in ME2, but he is still not failing every mission.

Hawke is like a character in the prologue of an RPG in which it is explained how things go wrong so that then the hero can step in and put things right. Hawke himself fails to do so. I think a classical hero is defined by two things. First, to be an outstanding being, and second to be in the right place at the right time. Hawke was actually an outstanding person, but he was in the wrong place at the wrong time to change anything. Which makes him a heroic personality, but not the actual hero that saves the day. At least not for the player, since we as player know more than for example the common folk who maybe never even met Hawke in person. We know that Kirkwall may have been better off if Hawke had perished in the Blight (assuming that the expedition would never have brought the idol back, and Meredith wouldn't have been driven insane by it then). And that's not helping the case either.

And I think people are fooling themselves if they think that optional side quests will have far reaching consequences for the next game. I mean give me examples where it happend from DA:O to DA2 or ME to ME2.

I'm not defending Hawke's lack of action, don't get me wrong. It's just that the plot needs to move forward and tell a certain story. If Hawke was able to get rid of Petrice, then the Qunari wouldn't rise up because of her fanatic ways and Hawke wouldn't become Champion. And if he isn't Champion, why is Cassandra looking for someone called the Champion of Kirkwall, which is an honorific bestowed upon people who earn the title of Champion?

Trust me, I could give a long dissertation on what I would've done story-wise in a basic way that allows for Hawke to be proactive enough and still has a plot that moves forward and makes sense. Hell I would've had the side-quests change Hawke's Rise to Power.

And that's sort of where the game fell apart. The choices didn't have to be world-changing, but they did need to be story changing on how Hawke rose to power. Hell I even came up with a way Hawke could work to undermine the authority of the Templars depending on the faction he's aligned with. I'm trying to dig it up now.

Most people if not all don't want to play a person with a heroic personality who doesn't use that persona to the fullest.

[Wulfram]

Morroian wrote...

Exactly, although they don't affect the narrative. And with the narrative I'd actually argue Hawke is pro-active with the Qunari in Act 2 as much as any protagonist in an rpg is. Hawke is trying to help the situation, we may not have any choices to make but Hawke's is involved.  

Hawke runs errands for Arishok and Viscount.  That's active I suppose, but it's not pro-active.  Unless you're playing an Aggressive Hawke who sides with Petrice I guess, but most people aren't.

I'd also note that Hawke fails at all these errands.

[Morroian]

Wulfram wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Exactly, although they don't affect the narrative. And with the narrative I'd actually argue Hawke is pro-active with the Qunari in Act 2 as much as any protagonist in an rpg is. Hawke is trying to help the situation, we may not have any choices to make but Hawke's is involved.  

Hawke runs errands for Arishok and Viscount.  That's active I suppose, but it's not pro-active. 

And the Warden runs errands for everyone hence the fact that Hawke is similar in terms of being pro-active.

[Wulfram]

Morroian wrote...

And the Warden runs errands for everyone hence the fact that Hawke is similar in terms of being pro-active.

But the Warden usually doesn't just follow orders, but ends up making his own choice as to what needs doing.  Whereas Hawke just follows orders for the whole act.

IE in Orzammar you spend a lot of time running errands.  But you at least get to choose whose errands you're running, can attempt to play both sides, get to decide what happens to the anvil and ultimately pick who is King.

[AlexXIV]

Morroian wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Exactly, although they don't affect the narrative. And with the narrative I'd actually argue Hawke is pro-active with the Qunari in Act 2 as much as any protagonist in an rpg is. Hawke is trying to help the situation, we may not have any choices to make but Hawke's is involved.  

Hawke runs errands for Arishok and Viscount.  That's active I suppose, but it's not pro-active. 

And the Warden runs errands for everyone hence the fact that Hawke is similar in terms of being pro-active.

The Warden decides to stop the Blight, and to use the treaties. Granted. the player does not have a choice there, but the Warden does. That's the main difference between the Warden and Hawke. Nobody told the Warden to do it. Not even Flemeth. The Warden does errand jobs for everyone, but not for money or for free. The Warden needs their support in the battle, the Warden's battle, because without the Warden there would not be a Battle at Denerim at all. Only darkspawn killing and tainting everything. Without the Warden there wouldn't be a Ferelden anymore and the Blight would probably spread and last years if not decades until it is stopped.

So you can say without the Warden things would have looked much worse. And you can say without Hawke things may have went alot better. For Kirkwall and the mages. I don't know why this is so hard to understand, probably because some people don't want to recognize it. Hawke is maybe helping a few people in side quests, including companions. That's all good and fine. But in the grand scale Hawke can't prevent the worst to happen and if you just count the bodies of those who die because of Hawke and those he saves, Hawke is not even close to be a classical savior, defender or ... whatever. He's just a guy who got caught up in circumstances and barely makes it out of the mess alive.
 
If he has any historical significance then because of the tales and rumors around him and his presence in Kirkwall and the events that led to the Right. DA2 is about Meredith, Orsino, Anders, Elfina and maybe Cullen. Hawke is at best in sixth place of the people who had influence on the things that happened. If I don't count Varric and Flemeth.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 16 septembre 2011 - 03:01 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

Wulfram wrote...

Morroian wrote...

And the Warden runs errands for everyone hence the fact that Hawke is similar in terms of being pro-active.

But the Warden usually doesn't just follow orders, but ends up making his own choice as to what needs doing.  Whereas Hawke just follows orders for the whole act.

IE in Orzammar you spend a lot of time running errands.  But you at least get to choose whose errands you're running, can attempt to play both sides, get to decide what happens to the anvil and ultimately pick who is King.

The Warden and Hawke is equally restricted. That is jsut how gaming works. They are both always presented with a choice and forced to react to the situation. Neither can make a pro-active decision. The Warden do a better job at giving you the illusion of being pro-active though.

[Addai]

mousestalker wrote...

I'm not following your objection here. You present a reality based comment, then follow it with an objection.

My point is, fanfiction counts for nothing.  We're discussing the game story, not the sexual escapades of Hawke and Co. in the kmeme.

[AlexXIV]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Morroian wrote...

And the Warden runs errands for everyone hence the fact that Hawke is similar in terms of being pro-active.

But the Warden usually doesn't just follow orders, but ends up making his own choice as to what needs doing.  Whereas Hawke just follows orders for the whole act.

IE in Orzammar you spend a lot of time running errands.  But you at least get to choose whose errands you're running, can attempt to play both sides, get to decide what happens to the anvil and ultimately pick who is King.

The Warden and Hawke is equally restricted. That is jsut how gaming works. They are both always presented with a choice and forced to react to the situation. Neither can make a pro-active decision. The Warden do a better job at giving you the illusion of being pro-active though.

No there is a difference between player options and protagonist options. The Warden could have fled to Kirkwall as well or to Orlais, joining with the other Wardens and waiting for the Blight to swallow all of Ferelden because of silly Loghain. Other Warden survivers also fled and hid after the Battle of Ostagar. What make the Warden great is that he does not run, at least not far. Only to fight another day while Hawke runs and leaves Ferelden behind. That's the very first thing we see the differences between them. Hawke is the one who is blown away, and the Warden is the one who stands his ground. Maybe they both make this decision, but in the end the Warden succeeds and saves Ferelden and Hawke ... well Hawke survives.

[Addai]

- Songlian - wrote...
I guess it all comes down to what you want to play in a game. Do you want your hero to be 'the chosen one' type that stands in the middle of the storm, or do you want a more subtle approach to your 'saving kittens and kicking ass' adventures? The second variant worked much better for me, and I'd like to see more of it in the future.  (Just coupled with a stronger background story, tho.)

But Hawke was "the chosen one."  How else can I play the entire game as a mage and yet the templars leave Hawke alone?  You become champion, you can become viscount, but it doesn't mean anything.  You become the chosen one but don't do anything with it.  That's exactly what the haters are complaining about.

[AlexXIV]

Addai67 wrote...

- Songlian - wrote...
I guess it all comes down to what you want to play in a game. Do you want your hero to be 'the chosen one' type that stands in the middle of the storm, or do you want a more subtle approach to your 'saving kittens and kicking ass' adventures? The second variant worked much better for me, and I'd like to see more of it in the future.  (Just coupled with a stronger background story, tho.)

But Hawke was "the chosen one."  How else can I play the entire game as a mage and yet the templars leave Hawke alone?  You become champion, you can become viscount, but it doesn't mean anything.  You become the chosen one but don't do anything with it.  That's exactly what the haters are complaining about.

Well yes, that's what I am complaining about. Remember the destiny trailer? According to this trailer Hawke is the one who runs and fights destiny and gets swallowed, while the Warden embraces it (destiny as a Grey Warden is to end the Blight). But if you look the trailer it clearly suggests that Hawke is the one who embraces destiny. In the game though Hawke runs or fights and every victory does have a bad taste to it. Be it that family members die or things get turned around during the next 3 years so that what Hawke fought for was for naught. It's like a curse of bad luck. Either the meaning of the trailer was not what everyone first thought, or ... they just chose to make a different game half way in.