122 réponses à ce sujet

[TEWR]

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.

Not true. The Warden is almost entirely reactive, but has moments where he can be proactive. When Avernus decides to submit to the Warden's judgement, the Warden is given various choices. By letting him continue his research after reading his notes on refining the Joining ritual, you are being proactive.

[2pro- + reactive[/i]] :[/b] acting in anticipation of future problems, needs, or changes[/i]

The Warden knows that anything to help combat the Darkspawn is needed, and letting Avernus live is being proactive because he's been researching the Taint for a long time.

Hawke's problem is that much of his proactive decisions have to be roleplayed to exist. You have to imagine that he did something instead of just being a lump. And while this is an RPG and you should roleplay your characters, for me DAII made roleplaying my Hawke a chore because of how bad the story was (imo).

But that's just me.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 16 septembre 2011 - 06:11 .

[Quething]

- Songlian - wrote...

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.)

"Hurtled into the chaos, you fight. And the world will shape before you."

If Hawke's actually a shmuck, that makes Flemeth a flattering liar or a straight-up idiot. Neither seems particularly in-character.

I know a lot of people put the whole passivity/proactivity debate down to poor marketing, like "the trailers trying to sell us a hero isn't the fault of the writers who genuinely were trying something different," but... the writing tries to convince you Hawke is a world-shaker too. Not just Cassandra's misunderstanding or Varric's obvious lies, but the actual, for-real this-is-what-happened meat of the story.

[Morroian]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Not true. The Warden is almost entirely reactive, but has moments where he can be proactive. When Avernus decides to submit to the Warden's judgement, the Warden is given various choices. By letting him continue his research after reading his notes on refining the Joining ritual, you are being proactive.

Thats a personal decision along the lines of the decisions Hawke makes about various npcs as well.

[Addai]

The real truth about Flemeth... it's more dastardly than anyone ever imagined... she's on the EA marketing payroll. 

Modifié par Addai67, 16 septembre 2011 - 10:34 .

[whykikyouwhy]

Addai67 wrote...

The real truth about Flemeth... it's more dastardly than anyone ever imagined... she's on the EA marketing payroll. 

I don't...er...*koff* I mean, she doesn't work for EA.



And the real truth is that she isn't interested in money. Just sweet, tasty souls.

[Sabariel]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

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.

Not true. The Warden is almost entirely reactive, but has moments where he can be proactive. When Avernus decides to submit to the Warden's judgement, the Warden is given various choices. By letting him continue his research after reading his notes on refining the Joining ritual, you are being proactive.

[2pro- + reactive[/i]] :[/b] acting in anticipation of future problems, needs, or changes[/i]

The Warden knows that anything to help combat the Darkspawn is needed, and letting Avernus live is being proactive because he's been researching the Taint for a long time.

Hawke's problem is that much of his proactive decisions have to be roleplayed to exist. You have to imagine that he did something instead of just being a lump. And while this is an RPG and you should roleplay your characters, for me DAII made roleplaying my Hawke a chore because of how bad the story was (imo).

But that's just me.

Total agreement from me...!

[Shadow Fox]

Morroian wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Not true. The Warden is almost entirely reactive, but has moments where he can be proactive. When Avernus decides to submit to the Warden's judgement, the Warden is given various choices. By letting him continue his research after reading his notes on refining the Joining ritual, you are being proactive.

Thats a personal decision along the lines of the decisions Hawke makes about various npcs as well.

*nods at the sagely Morroian's truth*

[AlexXIV]

You know, I am not against a story of a 'normal' guy. Or a unknown hero who is just trying to survive and help those who are close to him. If that was Bioware's intention then why the destiny trailer, why Flemeth's speech, why the Champion thing, why involve him with the mage-templar conflict, why let him fight demons in the fade that nobody but he or the warden could probably defeat. Bioware themselves put Hawke on the same level as the Warden. And then they let him fail, repeatedly.

I mean they could just have skipped all the superhero hype about the 'most important person of Thedas' (haha) and said it is the story of a refugee, rather a down to earth story. But that's just not the case. Hawke is a 'chose one', just that he is rather an Anakin than a Luke. He has the potential but he fails to use it. And that makes him look lame. Add to that the rushed development, how could they really think Hawke would get anywhere as popular as the Warden?

[esper]

Hawke was marketed as having destiny trust upon them which was exactly what happened.

[AlexXIV]

esper wrote...

Hawke was marketed as having destiny trust upon them which was exactly what happened.

The problem with destiny is that if you believe that things happen for a reason and whatever happens is supposed to happen, what motivates you to get out of your bed in the morning? You can just stay in bed and say whatever happens, has to happen. That's destiny. That's why I don't believe in destiny.

[whykikyouwhy]

AlexXIV wrote...

You know, I am not against a story of a 'normal' guy. Or a unknown hero who is just trying to survive and help those who are close to him. If that was Bioware's intention then why the destiny trailer, why Flemeth's speech, why the Champion thing, why involve him with the mage-templar conflict, why let him fight demons in the fade that nobody but he or the warden could probably defeat. Bioware themselves put Hawke on the same level as the Warden. And then they let him fail, repeatedly.

I mean they could just have skipped all the superhero hype about the 'most important person of Thedas' (haha) and said it is the story of a refugee, rather a down to earth story. But that's just not the case. Hawke is a 'chose one', just that he is rather an Anakin than a Luke. He has the potential but he fails to use it. And that makes him look lame. Add to that the rushed development, how could they really think Hawke would get anywhere as popular as the Warden?

Destiny does not necessarily imply "greatness" - at least not greatness that is defined by riches or standing atop the mountain with arms akimbo, having just saved the world. Destiny implies a role in something of magnitude - it could be a small role, or it could be a large role, but it is a place in the shifting chaos that forms an event known by all.

That happens for Hawke - (s)he is, by various circumstances, dropped along a path leading to the ultimate mage/templar schism. Flemeth's speech on Sundermount is perfect for this - a person, in crazy cicumstances, could opt to just stand down, or not take a side. To not assist his/her friends, to not explore, etc. The Witch is also setting the stage for events yet to come, which will probably be affected by the events of DA2. The role of Champion is significant because it changes how Hawke is perceived by those around him/her, including Meredith and Orsino.

I don't recall any use of "chosen one" in any ads, but, like "destiny", "chosen one" does not necessarily mean that the person is going to wind up being the glorious hero of epic poetry - at least not the glossed up hero (because I'm sure the hero business is far grittier than we've been led to believe). Chosen one means initiating/influencing or being part and party to change. You can say that about Hawke. That doesn't make the character lame. It makes the character subject to his/her circumstances. The end result of DA2 is that the structure of the world/society has been altered, dramatically. Hawke had a role in that, if even from the level of knowing the people directly involved (and either letting them live or die). That's what the world will remember, what Thedas will remember...that the Champion of Kirkwall was there, was present, when the world changed. People will look to the Champion for guidance, for answers, for a direction in the days to come...hence you have the Seekers hunting him/her down.

[Addai]

Hawke doesn't initiate any change that leads to the mage templar war. Except the inexplicable, plot-driven inability to see Anders as dangerous and do something about it. So all she does is stand idly by while others make destiny. And the Maker help anyone who looks to her for answers, except about how to deliver snarky one-liners.

[whykikyouwhy]

Addai67 wrote...

Hawke doesn't initiate any change that leads to the mage templar war. Except the inexplicable, plot-driven inability to see Anders as dangerous and do something about it. So all she does is stand idly by while others make destiny. And the Maker help anyone who looks to her for answers, except about how to deliver snarky one-liners.

This is where I think the basis for this thread (and others of a similar vein) comes down to expectations. Some players wanted Hawke to do X, Y, or Z, but his/her choices were A, B, and C, and there is much frustration from not having that X or Y, even those X and Y options do not meld with the story being told.

Hawke had influence on small levels throughout the game - namely, did you side with the mages or templars on several quests, did you let certain characters live or let them go free (or make them tranquil), etc. It's a domino effect, a ripple in the pond. While it seems insignificant, the life saved or destroyed may yet have an impact on how the mage/templar schism pans out. The fact is, the game ended on the cusp of that - right when the proverbial sh*t hit the fan. It's going to be bad in the days and years to come, and that will be addressed in later games, I'm sure. So much of what Hawke did or did not do in the confines of DA2 could still have a tremendous impact - we just don't know the exact details yet.

As a side note, I wouldn't mind knowing how to smoothly deliver snarky one-liners. That's a useful skill to have.

[AlexXIV]

whykikyouwhy wrote...
Destiny does not necessarily imply "greatness" - at least not greatness that is defined by riches or standing atop the mountain with arms akimbo, having just saved the world. Destiny implies a role in something of magnitude - it could be a small role, or it could be a large role, but it is a place in the shifting chaos that forms an event known by all.

That happens for Hawke - (s)he is, by various circumstances, dropped along a path leading to the ultimate mage/templar schism. Flemeth's speech on Sundermount is perfect for this - a person, in crazy cicumstances, could opt to just stand down, or not take a side. To not assist his/her friends, to not explore, etc. The Witch is also setting the stage for events yet to come, which will probably be affected by the events of DA2. The role of Champion is significant because it changes how Hawke is perceived by those around him/her, including Meredith and Orsino.

I don't recall any use of "chosen one" in any ads, but, like "destiny", "chosen one" does not necessarily mean that the person is going to wind up being the glorious hero of epic poetry - at least not the glossed up hero (because I'm sure the hero business is far grittier than we've been led to believe). Chosen one means initiating/influencing or being part and party to change. You can say that about Hawke. That doesn't make the character lame. It makes the character subject to his/her circumstances. The end result of DA2 is that the structure of the world/society has been altered, dramatically. Hawke had a role in that, if even from the level of knowing the people directly involved (and either letting them live or die). That's what the world will remember, what Thedas will remember...that the Champion of Kirkwall was there, was present, when the world changed. People will look to the Champion for guidance, for answers, for a direction in the days to come...hence you have the Seekers hunting him/her down.

I know what destiny means. It means that someone or something greater than we has control over the world and we are just pawns in a game others play. And that's why it's lame. Sorry. I prefer people who take things in their own hands like all great people in history did. Hawke's role is like when I run over a street, a car hits me and the guy in the car could have saved the world but died in the accident. Yes it would be my doing that he died, but that doesn't make me special, just the idiot who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. And I doubt anyone would look up to me for guildance because of that. I know the game tells you that people will look for Hawke to help resolve their problems in the comming war. But honestly, if he was so skilled at solving problems, why did things go so bad in Kirkwall. My money is on the Warden, if he's still around and kicking. And I suspect a majority thinks so as well. Because it's really obvious who of them is better at solving problems. The truth is that Hawke had nothing to do with the templar-mage conflict, at least not actively, and that he failed at preventing things from getting out of hand. That's hardly a recommendation.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 17 septembre 2011 - 06:58 .

[esper]

AlexXIV wrote...

esper wrote...

Hawke was marketed as having destiny trust upon them which was exactly what happened.

The problem with destiny is that if you believe that things happen for a reason and whatever happens is supposed to happen, what motivates you to get out of your bed in the morning? You can just stay in bed and say whatever happens, has to happen. That's destiny. That's why I don't believe in destiny.

I don't personally believe in destiny, but it is a game and thus Hawke clearly had a 'destiny' which was to be the symbol of the mage/templar war. Most game protagonist has a destiny, because something has always been decided from the game makers side as 'has to happen'.

Modifié par esper, 17 septembre 2011 - 06:57 .

[AlexXIV]

esper wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

esper wrote...

Hawke was marketed as having destiny trust upon them which was exactly what happened.

The problem with destiny is that if you believe that things happen for a reason and whatever happens is supposed to happen, what motivates you to get out of your bed in the morning? You can just stay in bed and say whatever happens, has to happen. That's destiny. That's why I don't believe in destiny.

I don't personally believe in destiny, but it is a game and thus Hawke clearly had a 'destiny' which was to be the symbol of the mage/templar war. Most game protagonist has a destiny, because something has always been decided from the game makers side as 'has to happen'.

I liked how the Warden accomplished things of which all people thought it is impossible. And said so. They kept thanking the Maker when they should have just thanked the Warden. They said my Warden would die slaying the Archdemon but he didn't. That's why the Warden is great. No matter what people say, he proves them wrong. Hawke is burdened with responsibilities beyond his abilities. That's why he can't prevent things going bad. That's like the opposite, people come to him to ask him for help and he can't.

[Addai]

whykikyouwhy wrote...
The fact is, the game ended on the cusp of that - right when the proverbial sh*t hit the fan. It's going to be bad in the days and years to come, and that will be addressed in later games, I'm sure. So much of what Hawke did or did not do in the confines of DA2 could still have a tremendous impact - we just don't know the exact details yet.

The question being, then, why I should care.  I'd rather not see Hawke ever again, and I don't care what happens to her or her "legacy."

[esper]

AlexXIV wrote...

esper wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

esper wrote...

Hawke was marketed as having destiny trust upon them which was exactly what happened.

The problem with destiny is that if you believe that things happen for a reason and whatever happens is supposed to happen, what motivates you to get out of your bed in the morning? You can just stay in bed and say whatever happens, has to happen. That's destiny. That's why I don't believe in destiny.

I don't personally believe in destiny, but it is a game and thus Hawke clearly had a 'destiny' which was to be the symbol of the mage/templar war. Most game protagonist has a destiny, because something has always been decided from the game makers side as 'has to happen'.

I liked how the Warden accomplished things of which all people thought it is impossible. And said so. They kept thanking the Maker when they should have just thanked the Warden. They said my Warden would die slaying the Archdemon but he didn't. That's why the Warden is great. No matter what people say, he proves them wrong. Hawke is burdened with responsibilities beyond his abilities. That's why he can't prevent things going bad. That's like the opposite, people come to him to ask him for help and he can't.

I dislike god mode characters. It is unrealistic and often the most immersion breaking thing for me in rpg's. Save the world beside the odds is a story that has been done a thousand times and I have outgrown those stories. I don't enjoy them anymore.

As for the warden. As much as I like Morrigan I hope that the ogb is the evil of evil because if he is not the ritual is really just a cheap get of of jail for free card, just as the Circle was a get of for free card with the Redcliff situation in da:o.

I like Hawke because she for me struggled as hard as she could which made it so much easier for me to connect. I don't need 'epic' characters,  I felt Hawke's up and down. I was proad to be champion because it was a real struggle to get there and I felt my Hawke's my canon's Hawke desperation in act 3 because the mages (her people) who she just wanted to protect, didn't wanted to be protected and I also felt how she lost her patience and became more and more agrressive during the game as she realized that she could not save the world, just do her little bit to make to the first steps to make it better for her kind. I did not feel anything with the warden as I never doubted that my warden would win against the impossible odds. Morrigan even offered me a get of trouble card in the end so I never felt troubled.
But that is an opinion and you are of course welcome to disagree. I just don't like god-mode characters.

Modifié par esper, 17 septembre 2011 - 07:18 .

[whykikyouwhy]

AlexXIV wrote...
 I prefer people who take things in their own hands like all great people in history did.

So no love or respect for the people who became great by accident or happenstance? The gent who discovered penicillin (and consequently saved hundreds of lives) stumbled upon his fame. 

My point is, not everyone takes up a sword and is able to forge his/her own path upon the world and achieve greatness at the end of the day, with the corpses of his/her foes lying about. Circumstances have much to do with that. Being in the right place at the right time, or the wrong place at that.

Perceived passivity does not necessarily dictate that someone is not active, or making decisions, or influencing change just because the results are not immediate and glaring.

[AlexXIV]

esper wrote...

I like Hawke because she for me struggled as hard as she could which made it so much easier for me to connect. I don't need 'epic' characters,  I felt Hawke's up and down. I was proad to be champion because it was a real struggle to get there and I felt my Hawke's my canon's Hawke desperation in act 3 because the mages (her people) who she just wanted to protect, didn't wanted to be protected and I also felt how she lost her patience and became more and more agrressive during the game as she realized that she could not save the world, just do her little bit to make to the first steps to make it better for her kind. I did not feel anything with the warden as I never doubted that my warden would win against the impossible odds. Morrigan even offered me a get of trouble card in the end so I never felt troubled.
But that is an opinion and you are of course welcome to disagree. I just don't like god-mode characters.

Two of the best RPGs who are not older than 10 years are Morrowind and DA:O to me. Others are KotOR and Fallout. They all feature godmode characters. I mean fairytales are not so popular because they are so realistic. Even in Dark Fantasy you at least get a strong hero who does not fail all the time. I mean for realism you have real life. I don't really need a game that confronts me with real life problems. I play games to not think about them for a while. I like depth in a game, something to think about. I liked that in DA:O and Morrowind because you first get an impression, and then you start collecting puzzle pieces and are surprised.

What surprised me with DA:O was that I was at first a faithful Maker type. The chant of light sounded good to me. But actually Morrigan changed my mind about alot of things. And that's not just because she's hot. In DA2 things never change. I was mage supporter from start and still am. Maybe that's because I made up my mind in DA:O already, but anyway. I like it if games surprise me. I had no surprises in DA2. Some of my fears came true, which was disappointing but not really the same as a surprise.

[AlexXIV]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
 I prefer people who take things in their own hands like all great people in history did.

So no love or respect for the people who became great by accident or happenstance? The gent who discovered penicillin (and consequently saved hundreds of lives) stumbled upon his fame. 

My point is, not everyone takes up a sword and is able to forge his/her own path upon the world and achieve greatness at the end of the day, with the corpses of his/her foes lying about. Circumstances have much to do with that. Being in the right place at the right time, or the wrong place at that.

Perceived passivity does not necessarily dictate that someone is not active, or making decisions, or influencing change just because the results are not immediate and glaring.

Well the guy who discovered penicillin did something good. You can't argue about success. Hawke doesn't succeed. His major role is to bring the artifact from the deeproads which sends people on a killing spree which he then later stops, too late to prevent the war. I mean luck exists. And whoever have it I shall have it. Most, if not all great people got lucky at times I am sure. But in the end you have to take the positive and the negative and get to a resume. And in Hawke's case my resume is that he did more bad than good, even if he had good intentions, which is not even clear since his personality is player defined.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 17 septembre 2011 - 07:37 .

[esper]

AlexXIV wrote...

esper wrote...

I like Hawke because she for me struggled as hard as she could which made it so much easier for me to connect. I don't need 'epic' characters,  I felt Hawke's up and down. I was proad to be champion because it was a real struggle to get there and I felt my Hawke's my canon's Hawke desperation in act 3 because the mages (her people) who she just wanted to protect, didn't wanted to be protected and I also felt how she lost her patience and became more and more agrressive during the game as she realized that she could not save the world, just do her little bit to make to the first steps to make it better for her kind. I did not feel anything with the warden as I never doubted that my warden would win against the impossible odds. Morrigan even offered me a get of trouble card in the end so I never felt troubled.
But that is an opinion and you are of course welcome to disagree. I just don't like god-mode characters.

Two of the best RPGs who are not older than 10 years are Morrowind and DA:O to me. Others are KotOR and Fallout. They all feature godmode characters. I mean fairytales are not so popular because they are so realistic. Even in Dark Fantasy you at least get a strong hero who does not fail all the time. I mean for realism you have real life. I don't really need a game that confronts me with real life problems. I play games to not think about them for a while. I like depth in a game, something to think about. I liked that in DA:O and Morrowind because you first get an impression, and then you start collecting puzzle pieces and are surprised.

What surprised me with DA:O was that I was at first a faithful Maker type. The chant of light sounded good to me. But actually Morrigan changed my mind about alot of things. And that's not just because she's hot. In DA2 things never change. I was mage supporter from start and still am. Maybe that's because I made up my mind in DA:O already, but anyway. I like it if games surprise me. I had no surprises in DA2. Some of my fears came true, which was disappointing but not really the same as a surprise.

I actually changed my mind of the chantry in da2. In da:o I was much like you first described, but Leliana managed to pull wool over my eyes. Never played Morrowind, but I disliked Oblivion and am still unsure if I should give Skyrim a go. I never made it through Fallout, the story just didn't catch me.
Don't get me wrong, I liked da:o. Both it was not because of the main story, the main story bored me as hell. It was the companions and the npc's as it has always been with bioware. Da2 had me both with main story and companions - some of the npc's were badly done.

As I had said I have simply outgrown save the world fantasy plots and now I prefer to read and play fantasy stories that deal with other things. Such as for example moralty (da2), religion (shin megami tensei - all though they have a fair bit of save the world in them as well). One of the game I have enyoed most recently was 999, I really loved how that managed to make their totally crazy story sound scientific and the last sudoko in the true ending gave me the chills.

There was not really any surprised in da:o for me. I was not surprised by a unforseen plot twist , expect perhaps Wynne being dead. I don't know if I was suprised by plot twist in da2, but they did suspense quite, I was really impatienly waiting for how Anders' 'potion' would play out and what the effect would be. I prefer suspense to surprise, really. Unless it is a good and beliveable surprise- Hawke is the game-character I have felt is most real and most human of all the games I have recently played.

Even if da3 is a save the world story, da2 managed to make me so involved and opiniated with the world and its different fractions that I think that I am going to feel involved in the main plot - unless it is terrible cliche. That being sad I prefer another non-god-mode characther.