txgoldrush wrote...
A) Wrong, the storylines interact with eachother....might as well bring up the characters of Sheparding Wolves and The Unbridled Rescue again. Notice how those two stories converged in Act II, which helps lead to the big even in Act II. The stories DO connect mechanically. Blackpowder Courtesy and Promise matter in the plot. The First Sacrifice matter, etc. The only part that IS NOT FOCUSED is Act I, where the stories do seem far apart and don't connect, but as Act II and III roll along, they DO connect. The Qunari were a strong hallmark in Act II, however they are either A) defeated or 
leave with the relic, their purpose in Kirkwall fufilled. Hence only a Qunari remanat in Act III.
Hawke's family fleshes out the reason he or she is in Kirkwall, but they are not the focus of the story, just part of it.
And DAO is highly guilty of lack of focus, especially in the midgame. I can use your logic for the four main mid quests as well. They converge far more weakly than DAII's subplots do.
I would have preferred you stating the details rather than merely listing quest names as your response, for it does little in explaining you claim. Sheparding wolves introduces certain characters that appear in Act II, such as the Qun and Petrice, and Unbidden Rescue was about the Viscount's son, no? While it certainly ties certain characters between the acts together, the events that transpire, the best to my memory, has little to do with the larger conflict/crisis in Act II.
Let's look at Blackpower Courtesy, hmm. Oh yes, the poison ally quest. Well, the Arishok and the Viscount is in it, I'll give you that. And I suppose we learn a little something about the Qun, the elves and Isabella if she is in the party. Interesting story, though has little to do with the events that will ultimately transpire at the end of Act II. First Sacrifice... let's see, hmm... your going to have to explain this one because I can find little connection between this and say, Mages vs. Templars, or Qunari troubles.
Not to say that these are bad quests. The problem is that they don't really help piece together any obvious plot or narrative. They are interesting in isolation, and brings in a few interesting NPCs, but does little in tying the story together or bear much relationship to Hawke and his party.
You say that you can use my logic to support your claim that the main quests in DA:O lacks focus. Please explain further because you didn't mention it. The segments all lead to the support of the Grey Warden, no? Did DA2's subplots really lead up to Mages vs. Templars or Qunari troubles? Both games are guilty of some side-tracked story telling, but DA2 felt all over the place whereas DA:O, despite it's flaws, actually came together.
recycling archtypes shows a lack of creativity. Look at the Final Fantasy team, it was evident with them when they refered to FFXIII's Lightning as a "female Cloud". In almost every Final Fantasy game is about stopping a nihilist from destorying the world. They basically repackage FFVI over and over again when they stopped recycling the first five games. And hence how the series has declined. Even the protagonists are the same two archtypes.
Do I have to show the chart from Hellforge or the numerous posts comparing Bioware characters from different games?
They are cliched, ok. Lack of creativity? Maybe. The thing is, I don't see how making things differently necessarily consitutes an improvement. At the end of the day, it is the execution that matters. I'm not the one to say it, but a lot of people on this thread have already stated that they prefer a well executed cliche than poorly executed originality. I'm sure they aern't the minority either.
And no, I've seen the chart from Hellforge already, but thanks for your thoughtfulness. Hellforge seems to depict that DA:O was rather loose on the common cliches of previous Bioware games, but really, the most obvious indicators of cliches are: belonging in an elite order, thwarted by evil, dream sequences, and the discovery of ancient civilizations. DA2 didn't have any of the stated cliches, but it also wasn't that well received. As said before, being different doesn't constitute an improvement. Some aged old formulas do work.
C) They are bystanders other than Alistair and at a point Morrigan. This is a worse problem than most RPGs who mostly have their companions participate in the or have stronger ties to the story. Look at Planescape Torment, many of its companions knew the Nameless One before and had their lives impacted by him. They are just "there", they mattered. Half of KOTOR's cast participates in the plot, so do most of Jade Empire's cast...Dawn Star, Sagacious Zu, and Silk Fox play huge roles and the lesser cast members have their moments. Mass Effect 1 characters play their roles and the sequel characters define ME2's plot. DAO was a huge step back for Bioware in character relevance.
Its more than Anders and Isabela.....Aveline becomes a guardswoman and even captain which lets you roam freely around the city, she is also the Arishoks final straw. Varric convinces his brother to even allow Hawke on his expedition and Varric is the huge driver of the story. The elements of his story contribute to Meredith's. And Merrill and Fenris have much more fleshed out companion quests that do add to the plot and its themes. Most of DAII's cast is used in the plot properly, and even if they aren't important, particpate more in th eplot as well.
And how do they bear their "team". In fact Anders and Merrill do not like eachother, even if they are both mages. Sebastian supports the Templar position more, but doesn't always like their tactics. Also, the character development is FAR stronger in DAII than it was in Origins, in fact, a major part of the problem in DAO is the interesting stuff, most of the character development has already happened. The characters in DAO talk, but DAII shows their development. This cannot be debated. Look at Leliana's Song, her DLC, she is the only character in DAO where you can experience her full character development. The other cast comes in 90% developed.
Since you mentioned Mass Effect, the companions in DA:O weren't all that much different from the whole space faring troupe, so I don't see how exactly step backwards DA:O was in this regard. They were worthy to be recruited to battle the blight. Sten wasn't anymore as alien to the group as Wrex, and both were blunt weapons at the disposal of the protagonist. They formed a part of the bigger story, even if their absence makes little to affect the final outcome. Your companions cooperated with you, even when their motivations differed from one another.
In DA2, they force the story, which is a whole other thing entirely. You have Bethany, who just dies suddenly. You have Hawke's mother, who just gets Frankensteined and dies. You have Fenris, who is so obsessed with revenge that he just sides with a faction until you give him a one line speach in which case he goes, "oh, in that case...". You have Anders/Justice, who forces the conflict in Act III from his already one-sided anti-templar thinking since you first meet him from the beginning. And you have Isabella, ah, a rogue from start to finish whom I'm surprised isn't downed by STDs already. Is this what you mean by development?
As for Varric, well, he
is telling the story isn't he? I suppose he is the most interesting of the bunch, but just because he leads you down to the deep so that you can get rich doesn't really make the story all that much more interesting than the Cliche of an epic that is DA:O.
While I enjoyed his character, personally, but it didn't help the rest of the story in my opinion.
D) There is an aspect of a story called "theme" it is the underlying message the story portrays. A great story will always have a great theme....and DAII's is clear, that one person cannot be held soley responsible for a societal failure. So what does DAII do, have every quest be a part of the theme, about human failure and weakness, just like New Vegas's quests were centered around factional fighting ("War never changes, but men do" Lonesome Road) and how Jade Empire's quests were based on harmony and discord. Really another charge against DAO, its central theme, the one on a hero's sacrifice, isn't established until th every end.
"That one person cannot be held solely responsible for a societal failure." (I'm sure Anders would love to hear that). Heh, perhaps if they printed that statement on the box, people might just marginally give the game a higher score. But seriously, that theme isn't so clear at all. Not when the game consists of slaughtering bandits after bandits who parachute down on you, and taking up menial tasks left right and centre. If the game was about Templar Vs. Mages, I and many others certainly had a tough enough time finding any smooth transition to that conflict. The first suggestion of that sort of narrative was back in Act 1, but in Act 1, you were so focused on getting rich that the point simply got buried. If the game was about the Qunari, they should have kept them around in the third act. If the game was about Hawke's rise of power, they should have made the point more prevalent or made his role more than that of an "observer" that you previously mentioned.
And if the theme is really about societal failure and whose to blame, it certainly didn't surface much throughout the jumble of narrative that existed. I saw a lot of finger pointing between Qunari, Mage, and Templar, all of which
did lead to societal failure, but unfortunately, for the wrong reasons because the characters in the story were so dichotomous that one simply has to ask: "what is wrong with these people?!"
E) Cassandra is important, she is the Seeker looking for Hawke. In a story like DAII, you have to know the outcome first and thats Thedas is at war. You lose that, then the story will have no focus.
And when is a cliffhanger bad.....The Empire Strikes Back says hi.
And things DO change from act to act, while I do think it wasn't represented visually well, storywise they do change. The characters change as well...Isabela and Aveline come to respect eachother, Merill becomes far more pessemistic, Anders becomes more moody and loses more of his humor, etc. The lack of "change" wa sless of a writing problem than a world design one....although if you are observant, each act does have a different color filter.
Knowing the outcome first is like picking up a novel, reading the last chapter before reading the first. Or reading the spoilers for a game before finishing it through. Can be useful, but not needed. If the story tied together a little better, the audience should have been able grab hold of a hint that something was brewing. A story should have a focus throughout the entire narrative anyways.
When is a cliffhanger bad? When it starts from the very beginning of the game. "Let me guess, your precious chantry's fallen to pieces and has put the entire world in the brink of war, and you need the one person who can put it back together, " say Varric at the beginning, and while the story followed Hawke from his slaughter of darkspawn to his slaughter of Templars and Mages, by the end of the game, nothing really gets put back together and oh, where did Hawke go? What can Hawke really do to resolve the conflict? Why Hawke? The latter two questions should have been answered in DA2, but if there were any signs to an answer, they certainly weren't obvious. To further add to this, each time we go back to the interrogation between Cassandra and Varric, the only thing we even see from Cassandra is her asking what happened next.
At least the Empire Strikes Back actually answered a few questions and that there was some resolution to the story. An effective cliffhanger should leave the audience wondering "what will happen next?" not "what just happened?"
While things do change slightly by the end, the worst part of it all was that certain stories were left to linger way too long. Merrill's story was moving in some parts, but her "obsesssions" lingered so long that it seemed absurd. The same can be said about Fenris, but then, he never really changed.
I won't even try to comment about the color filter.
Retour en haut
