703 réponses à ce sujet

[OMTING52601]

Lord Aesir wrote...

Hawke was the result of the story Bioware decided to tell.  Usually, as in the case of the Warden and Shepard, the story is about fixinga problem (Blight and Reapers).  In the case of Hawke, they wanted to tell the story of how the Mage/Templar war got started.  A story about everything going to hell necesitates the protagonist not being able to fix things beyond his control.  It's a much darker story, in truth, than Bioware has given us previously.

Yeah. You know, I logically understand this point, especially since I make my money as a freelance writer. My question was rather poorly worded. My real problem is this: taking the story as it is, why sell the game as an RPG, more specifically as the sequel to a phenomenally popular and profitable RPG? They could easily have classified it as a fantasy actioner and it likely would have been a hit(new name and yes of course SOME original canon would need to be created but take out what little of Origins exists in DA2 and make up new world and no one would have been the wiser). Why try to sell a single direction narrative as an RPG?

Trying to set up the mage/templar war, realistically, could have been played out through a series of side quests(many, many less than are currently in game) where Hawke was involved/knew a sh*t storm was brewing, without Hawke directly being involved with the big blowout. For example, he's asked to save the girl mage being threatened with Tranquility and he's asked to help hunt down the fugitive blood mages. Hawke can do these tasks, and through a less 180'd version of Anders, could be privvy to a coming crisis without being directly involved in the Mage/Templar fight, so to speak.

Instead of the 'no choice' ending, Hawke finds himself showing up to the 'final battle' just as Meredith calls for the annulment and Orsino tells her to step off. Then Hawke has to fight his way to the final battle ground, where everyone is fighting everyone. At which point, Hawke can 'choose' to side with Mage/Templar or fight them all - either to save the innocents of Kirkwall or just because he wants to kill them all. In this scenario, the war is started, Hawke can be hero or villian, the story and included achievements would still be applicable, but the feel is much more player agent friendly.

Hell, I don't know if I'm making myself clear or not here, LOL.

[TEWR]

Lord Aesir wrote...

OMTING52601 wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

BW does this in many (most, almost all) of their games.  It is a successful template that has made them a fortune.  Why should they change a winning formula?

I'm not really sure what you're asking for, here.  Every story has already been told, writers just put new names and faces on the old ones.  There are no 'original' stories to be told.

Video games are different than books and movies because they're interactive.  Most people are not thrilled about the idea of playing through a 40 hour campaign only to have it all fall apart at the end.  People don't like that sort of thing.

I don't know why, but you posting this just made me sick to my stomach for ME 3. Sorry, OT. Or maybe not...

I mean, look at Shep. He's a strong protagonist through two, soon to be three, Bioware games. Hell, even the Warden is a strong, somewhat proactive, protagonist in Origins. So what the hell happened with Hawke? He's constantly reacting, constantly fumbling for the ball - so to speak.

I apologize if I'm iterating a point that's already been made. And I'm not being snide, there is no emotional inflection to this question.

Hawke was the result of the story Bioware decided to tell.  Usually, as in the case of the Warden and Shepard, the story is about fixinga problem (Blight and Reapers).  In the case of Hawke, they wanted to tell the story of how the Mage/Templar war got started.  A story about everything going to hell necesitates the protagonist not being able to fix things beyond his control.  It's a much darker story, in truth, than Bioware has given us previously.

Sure, telling a story about the world falling to pieces and it being beyond Hawke's control is fine. What isn't fine is that they made him take no action at all constantly until he was forced into it.

They made him a lazy and reactive protagonist that doesn't care about what's going on around him until it involves him, because then he can't sit around and be lazy anymore.

I would never call DAII a darker story because it just heaps mindless characters and kills them off in stupid ways for no reason other than because the plot demands it. Death is something that should only be done in moderation. Excess of death does not make something more "mature".

Hawke should've at least tried to keep things under control for much of the actual story even when it doesn't involve him. That would make him a proactive protagonist who inevitably fails, and that is something I would've loved to see.

Inaction is bad. Taking action only to fail is good.

[Foolsfolly]

Sure, telling a story about the world falling to pieces and it being beyond Hawke's control is fine. What isn't fine is that they made him take no action at all constantly until he was forced into it.

They made him a lazy and reactive protagonist that doesn't care about what's going on around him until it involves him, because then he can't sit around and be lazy anymore.

I would never call DAII a darker story because it just heaps mindless characters and kills them off in stupid ways for no reason other than because the plot demands it. Death is something that should only be done in moderation. Excess of death does not make something more "mature".

Hawke should've at least tried to keep things under control for much of the actual story even when it doesn't involve him. That would make him a proactive protagonist who inevitably fails, and that is something I would've loved to see.

Inaction is bad. Taking action only to fail is good.

Act 3 should have been at the very least twice the size of what it was in the finished game (that's 6 missions long in its entirety). And Hawke should have been made Viscount. That way for the longer act Hawke must side with or attempt to contain both sides of the Mage/Templar discussion.

The title of Champion seems to carry no responsibility or authority. The Champion Hawke turned out to be just a pawn who HAS to work with Meredith and can choose to take the exact same mission from Orsino if they had a history of supporting mages before.

And to take the discussion back 2 pages (sorry I get online at night), even if I concede the point that 'I know and Hawke doesn't know' there's still the problem that Anders has to know what I know.

And also that Cory's possession is not an Archdemon's possession, since that destroys both. And Archdemon's possession is hardly a possession since darkspawn are soulless vessels. The Archdemon just switches bodies. (Although, I've often wondered if it would morph that darkspawn into a dragon or not.) So knowledge of Archdemon possession is still not required. Hawke saw that Flemeth put part of her into an amulet. Hawke's aware that there are powerful magics that they will never understand in the universe.

And again, I do not concede that this is a case of 'I know, Hawke doesn't.' We both saw the same things.

[Sharn01]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...


fun fact: Mages can join the Ben-Hassrath, but they're watched very carefully.

Source please, I am unfamiliar with this, and since I am very familiar with DA lore I would assume that Hawke, and many citizens in Andrastian societies who know only a small fraction of what I know would be even more inclined to believe that all Qunari mages are chained and treated in the same way as Saarebas.

I also thought the Ben-Hassrath where the qunari brainwashers, I mean reeducators.

Modifié par Sharn01, 16 octobre 2011 - 06:46 .

[TobiTobsen]

Sharn01 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...


fun fact: Mages can join the Ben-Hassrath, but they're watched very carefully.

Source please

The Qunari that collects the swords in Act 3 tells you that you would have been a Ben-Hassrath in the Qun, if you bring him all swords back.

Could be canon, or just another "one fits all" piece of dialogue.

[TEWR]

Sharn01 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...


fun fact: Mages can join the Ben-Hassrath, but they're watched very carefully.

Source please, I am unfamiliar with this, and since I am very familiar with DA lore I would assume that Hawke, and many citizens in Andrastian societies who know only a small fraction of what I know would be even more inclined to believe that all Qunari mages are chained and treated in the same way as Saarebas.

I also thought the Ben-Hassrath where the qunari brainwashers, I mean reeducators.

It was confirmed by one of the devs. Mary Kirby I believe. But it does explain why Taarbas says a Mage Hawke can be Ben-Hassrath.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 16 octobre 2011 - 02:20 .

[Sidney]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Sure, telling a story about the world falling to pieces and it being beyond Hawke's control is fine. What isn't fine is that they made him take no action at all constantly until he was forced into it.

You seem to want to have this both ways. Do you want him being all "proactive" (whatever the heck that actually means to people it has become a generic code for "I don't like it") or do you want the world to fail?  The gripes about "proactivity" would be the same if being proactive always meant the world fails - unless he can stop disintegration being proactive is meaningless. The story starts from two premises:
1. Things have collapsed - that limits your choice although not much more in the end than the "things are always, 100% saved" story in in DAO which pre-determined your success.
2. Hawke's role has been misunderstood - oddly enough misunderstood by Cassandra to be almost exactly the story people who want a "proactive" Hawake want to have. It really almost feels like Bioware is actively poking fun at the "traditional" fantasy story of the insignificant hero who overcomes and saves the whole world.

The other point is that what we do matters even if it doesn't change the world. You can make choices in a world that is bigger than you and that does define who you are. For most of us, we aren't world changers on a day to day basis but our choices define who we are. Even "important" people don't always matter all that much. If you read "In the Garden of Beasts" you'll read about American Ambassador to Germany Dodd in 1933-34 as he watched Hitler's rise to power. He chooses a path, makes choices but doesn't stop the ****s or even slow them down but the book says a lot of the character of the man despite his ineffectiveness. The Odyessy, to pick a much older story, is about choices that also do not matter in the end because fate has picked a course and limited the range options available to the hero.

[TEWR]

Sidney wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Sure, telling a story about the world falling to pieces and it being beyond Hawke's control is fine. What isn't fine is that they made him take no action at all constantly until he was forced into it.

You seem to want to have this both ways. Do you want him being all "proactive" (whatever the heck that actually means to people it has become a generic code for "I don't like it") or do you want the world to fail?  The gripes about "proactivity" would be the same if being proactive always meant the world fails - unless he can stop disintegration being proactive is meaningless. The story starts from two premises:
1. Things have collapsed - that limits your choice although not much more in the end than the "things are always, 100% saved" story in in DAO which pre-determined your success.
2. Hawke's role has been misunderstood - oddly enough misunderstood by Cassandra to be almost exactly the story people who want a "proactive" Hawake want to have. It really almost feels like Bioware is actively poking fun at the "traditional" fantasy story of the insignificant hero who overcomes and saves the whole world.

Hawke should be taking a proactive stance to try to prevent the world from falling apart, only to inevitably fail. In this case, he wants to keep things under control all the time (before the game involves him) but in the end he fails.

A proactive Hawke is one who anticipates trouble and takes steps to ensure that it hopefully won't happen, which requires him to do many things. Being a glorified errand boy isn't that. If he fails, it's fine because the player is content with "At least I tried to make things not fall apart". 

[Sidney]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

A proactive Hawke is one who anticipates trouble and takes steps to ensure that it hopefully won't happen, which requires him to do many things. Being a glorified errand boy isn't that. If he fails, it's fine because the player is content with "At least I tried to make things not fall apart". 

This is a bogus argument. The Warden is nothing but an errand boy to a much greater extent...go get me some armies. Go find the urn, go find a paragon and so on. He is told exactly what to do and goes and does it by Flemeth, Morrigan, the Orleasian Warden or any of the "leaders" he deals with.

You again have to ask what could "proactive" do? How do you proactively stop the conflict with the Qunari? You don't know what is casuing the problem so you can't solve the book issue.  No one other than the Arishok and Isabella know the truth of that so unless you have some way to torture Isabella or the Arishok you aren't going to know and there's no reason to be torturing them anyways. So that means the Qunari won't leave. Great so now how do you diffuse tensions between the Chantry and Qunari if you can't make them leave? You, your hero, is going to change biases and bigotry of both sides that are centuries old? Right, that'll work out. You can try and solve symptoms but there is no way to cure the disease. Same issue with the Templars and Mages. There's not a simple solution to what is a very, very old problem that lacks a really good "right" answer. DAO offers you simple tasks with simple answers - people are bound to give you armies and they will if you do X that magically solves all their problems (find a paragon, find an urn, kill some werewolves). I actually respect that there's not some McGuffin that resolves all Qunari/Andrastian problems you can go on a quest to find to stop the conflict.

[AlexXIV]

Sidney wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

A proactive Hawke is one who anticipates trouble and takes steps to ensure that it hopefully won't happen, which requires him to do many things. Being a glorified errand boy isn't that. If he fails, it's fine because the player is content with "At least I tried to make things not fall apart". 

This is a bogus argument. The Warden is nothing but an errand boy to a much greater extent...go get me some armies. Go find the urn, go find a paragon and so on. He is told exactly what to do and goes and does it by Flemeth, Morrigan, the Orleasian Warden or any of the "leaders" he deals with.

You again have to ask what could "proactive" do? How do you proactively stop the conflict with the Qunari? You don't know what is casuing the problem so you can't solve the book issue.  No one other than the Arishok and Isabella know the truth of that so unless you have some way to torture Isabella or the Arishok you aren't going to know and there's no reason to be torturing them anyways. So that means the Qunari won't leave. Great so now how do you diffuse tensions between the Chantry and Qunari if you can't make them leave? You, your hero, is going to change biases and bigotry of both sides that are centuries old? Right, that'll work out. You can try and solve symptoms but there is no way to cure the disease. Same issue with the Templars and Mages. There's not a simple solution to what is a very, very old problem that lacks a really good "right" answer. DAO offers you simple tasks with simple answers - people are bound to give you armies and they will if you do X that magically solves all their problems (find a paragon, find an urn, kill some werewolves). I actually respect that there's not some McGuffin that resolves all Qunari/Andrastian problems you can go on a quest to find to stop the conflict.

No the Warden is no errand boy. It's the same differnce with you making a deal with someone or just helping him out for no specific reason. The Warden wants something from the dwarves and elves, so he gives something in return. It's called a deal. But Hawke mostly just helps people without gaining much. No respect, no authority, no final victory.

Simple difference is that everyone listened to the Warden and nobody listens to Hawke. You may not have much more options in the game, since what the Warden does is limited by the story plot. But plot aside, nobody forces the Warden. It is the Warden's choice to try stop the Blight. As it is Hawke's choice to do whatever he is doing. Just Hawke does not seem to have a purpose in his actions, and everytime there seems to be something of a purpose, he fails.

The Warden ends up as a hero, Hawke is either a pawn of the Chantry/templars or loses everything and has to leave Kirkwall.

[TEWR]

Sidney wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

A proactive Hawke is one who anticipates trouble and takes steps to ensure that it hopefully won't happen, which requires him to do many things. Being a glorified errand boy isn't that. If he fails, it's fine because the player is content with "At least I tried to make things not fall apart". 

This is a bogus argument. The Warden is nothing but an errand boy to a much greater extent...go get me some armies. Go find the urn, go find a paragon and so on. He is told exactly what to do and goes and does it by Flemeth, Morrigan, the Orleasian Warden or any of the "leaders" he deals with.

And you bring up the Warden why? I never once made the claim that the Warden wasn't an errand boy. He is (though he does have moments of being proactive).

Since Dragon Age II was tackling a much larger story it shoud've had a proactive protagonist.

You again have to ask what could "proactive" do? How do you proactively stop the conflict with the Qunari? You don't know what is casuing the problem so you can't solve the book issue.  No one other than the Arishok and Isabella know the truth of that so unless you have some way to torture Isabella or the Arishok you aren't going to know and there's no reason to be torturing them anyways. So that means the Qunari won't leave. Great so now how do you diffuse tensions between the Chantry and Qunari if you can't make them leave? You, your hero, is going to change biases and bigotry of both sides that are centuries old? Right, that'll work out. You can try and solve symptoms but there is no way to cure the disease.

To be fair I always had an idea that Isabela and the Qunari were linked.

But I'm talking about the Mage-Templar conflict, which should've been the main focus of all 3 acts with the first two act's plots being background plots of importance. The Qunari plot would still be the main focus of Act 2, but it should've been done in a way that relates to the characterization of Meredith a little bit (having her meet with the Arishok since she's the real power and having her approve of the Qunari treatment of mages, thus showing her zeal and hatred of mages).

But I don't want Hawke to be able to try and stop the Qunari tension. That's not what I'm arguing. Hawke can certainly anticipate that the Arishok will blow soon, but he doesn't know what to do to calm him because he's a foreign entity.

The only things that would've improved Act II's Qunari plot for me would be:

1) Meredith meeting with the Arishok
2) Saemus holding a peaceful rally to try and convince people of how the Qunari aren't monsters, and some people contemplate joining. Which would make Petrice's murder of him better.
3) The Arishok taking advantage of his Saar-Qamek recipe and using the defenses of Hightown, since he's the commander of the Antaam and is supposed to be a tactical general and impressive fighter.

Same issue with the Templars and Mages. There's not a simple solution to what is a very, very old problem that lacks a really good "right" answer. DAO offers you simple tasks with simple answers - people are bound to give you armies and they will if you do X that magically solves all their problems (find a paragon, find an urn, kill some werewolves). I actually respect that there's not some McGuffin that resolves all Qunari/Andrastian problems you can go on a quest to find to stop the conflict.

DAII wasn't grey. It had a villain despite Bioware's efforts to not make one because of the shoddy story they told and making Meredith clearly insane from the get-go of Act III by giving her the idol from Act I which only loosely tied the story together, if at all. Which isn't to say that it couldn't have been made grey. It could've. Even the idol could've been made grey if Bioware really wanted it!

A proactive Hawke could either do one of two things:

1) Join the Mage Underground and become the leader of it because he sees the Templars' abuses as going too far and eventually open war will break out, so he wants to free as many mages as possible to try and prevent it. This would also undermine Templar authority by showing the populus that they can't contain the mages and mages are now free.

2) Crush the Mage Underground because he believes they will grow even more violent and order must be kept in the city. This too would undermine Templar authority because they're relying on someone outside of the Order to contain the mages, showing that the Templars aren't that competent.

[Sidney]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
DAII wasn't grey. It had a villain despite Bioware's efforts to not make one because of the shoddy story they told and making Meredith clearly insane from the get-go of Act III by giving her the idol from Act I which only loosely tied the story together, if at all. Which isn't to say that it couldn't have been made grey. It could've. Even the idol could've been made grey if Bioware really wanted it!

A proactive Hawke could either do one of two things:

1) Join the Mage Underground and become the leader of it because he sees the Templars' abuses as going too far and eventually open war will break out, so he wants to free as many mages as possible to try and prevent it. This would also undermine Templar authority by showing the populus that they can't contain the mages and mages are now free.

2) Crush the Mage Underground because he believes they will grow even more violent and order must be kept in the city. This too would undermine Templar authority because they're relying on someone outside of the Order to contain the mages, showing that the Templars aren't that competent.

Again, what you want is cookie cutter exposition where you, the hero, are the leader and prime mover of things. I get that people like that form of story telling because it makes them feel important. What I can't understand is that people always want that form of story. It is like you want to see nothing but Rambo and can't watch Platoon because there's no one being "proactive" and winning the war on their own.

DA2 is flawed but the "hero" not being the lone wolf world historical spirit isn't one of them. That was something that was a bold choice and it worked on that level alone.

[Eudaemonium]

Ghidorah14 wrote...

Hawke is like the biggest tool in video game history or something. XD

I'm afraid this award goes to either Shujinko from Mortal Kombat: Deception, or Raziel from Legacy of Kain.

[Heimdall]

OMTING52601 wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

Hawke was the result of the story Bioware decided to tell.  Usually, as in the case of the Warden and Shepard, the story is about fixinga problem (Blight and Reapers).  In the case of Hawke, they wanted to tell the story of how the Mage/Templar war got started.  A story about everything going to hell necesitates the protagonist not being able to fix things beyond his control.  It's a much darker story, in truth, than Bioware has given us previously.

Yeah. You know, I logically understand this point, especially since I make my money as a freelance writer. My question was rather poorly worded. My real problem is this: taking the story as it is, why sell the game as an RPG, more specifically as the sequel to a phenomenally popular and profitable RPG? They could easily have classified it as a fantasy actioner and it likely would have been a hit(new name and yes of course SOME original canon would need to be created but take out what little of Origins exists in DA2 and make up new world and no one would have been the wiser). Why try to sell a single direction narrative as an RPG?

Trying to set up the mage/templar war, realistically, could have been played out through a series of side quests(many, many less than are currently in game) where Hawke was involved/knew a sh*t storm was brewing, without Hawke directly being involved with the big blowout. For example, he's asked to save the girl mage being threatened with Tranquility and he's asked to help hunt down the fugitive blood mages. Hawke can do these tasks, and through a less 180'd version of Anders, could be privvy to a coming crisis without being directly involved in the Mage/Templar fight, so to speak.

Instead of the 'no choice' ending, Hawke finds himself showing up to the 'final battle' just as Meredith calls for the annulment and Orsino tells her to step off. Then Hawke has to fight his way to the final battle ground, where everyone is fighting everyone. At which point, Hawke can 'choose' to side with Mage/Templar or fight them all - either to save the innocents of Kirkwall or just because he wants to kill them all. In this scenario, the war is started, Hawke can be hero or villian, the story and included achievements would still be applicable, but the feel is much more player agent friendly.

Hell, I don't know if I'm making myself clear or not here, LOL.

  I felt like DA2 was more of a setup than a story unto itself.  I enjoyed it, certainly, but I think the ideas you suggested might have helped.  On the otherhand, Bioware seems to have wanted to get the idea across that Hawke was being swept along by events outside his/her control.  Not prime RPG material most of the time, but they could have created better depth in the mage/templar conflict.  Letting Hawke help/hunt down the mage underground would have been a good step.

I don't need my Hawke to be the cause of events, but a deeper involvement in those events would have been preferable.

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 16 octobre 2011 - 07:27 .

[Addai]

Sidney wrote...

Again, what you want is cookie cutter exposition where you, the hero, are the leader and prime mover of things. I get that people like that form of story telling because it makes them feel important. What I can't understand is that people always want that form of story. It is like you want to see nothing but Rambo and can't watch Platoon because there's no one being "proactive" and winning the war on their own.

DA2 is flawed but the "hero" not being the lone wolf world historical spirit isn't one of them. That was something that was a bold choice and it worked on that level alone.

The problem is that Hawke is presented as all those things- the hero, the leader, the prime mover- in everything but major plot points where she could have acted in that fashion and inexplicably can't.  It's fine if people want to roleplay a character who cares about nothing more than crashing parties and playing dirty templar with Anders or count-the-corpses with Fenris and then *oops* world war, but for people who wanted a bit more range than that, the game is severely limited.

[TJPags]

Sidney wrote...

Again, what you want is cookie cutter exposition where you, the hero, are the leader and prime mover of things. I get that people like that form of story telling because it makes them feel important. What I can't understand is that people always want that form of story. It is like you want to see nothing but Rambo and can't watch Platoon because there's no one being "proactive" and winning the war on their own.

DA2 is flawed but the "hero" not being the lone wolf world historical spirit isn't one of them. That was something that was a bold choice and it worked on that level alone.

What you suggest is true, but only to a point.  In fact, it's exactly why the game doesn't work for me.

Platoon is a great movie.  No, they don't win the war themselves.  But it's a great movie.

The difference is, I'm watching the movie.  I'm not playing it.  I'm playing DA2.

When I'm playing a game, I want to do things.  It doesn't have to be saving the world, winning the war, etc.  It doesn't have to be about some global conflict- it can be limited to a single minor conflict, even if part of a major war that's ultimately lost - sort of, you rescued the king, but the kingdom was overrun.

Problem was, in DA2, I felt like an observer, watching things happen.  The guy on the street who witnesses a mugging, and then gives an ID to the cops.  Not the mugger.  Not the hero who stops it, or even the cop who catches the bad guy after the fact.  Just - hey, ya, I saw that happen.

Isabela stole the Qunari tome, not me.  She brings it to them, not me.  I got to decide what to do with her for the theft.

Merril found the mirror.  She fixed it.  Marethari set the demon free.  I got to kill it, sure, but none of it was my choice.

Anders was part of the mage underground.  He tried to help Karl.  I went along for the ride.

Anders blew up the Chantry.  I helped him shop, and didn't even know why.  Couldn't stop him if I wanted to.  Watched it happen.

Someone found the idol.  Bartrand brought it out.  Meredith bought it from someone else - maybe him.  Me?  I found my way out of the tunnels.  Then had to fight Meredith.

Etc.  Etc.  Etc.

Makes for a good movie, the person always around when important/interesting things happen - see Forrest Gump.  IMO, didn't at all make for a good game.

[Cobra's_back]

Addai67 wrote...

Sidney wrote...

Again, what you want is cookie cutter exposition where you, the hero, are the leader and prime mover of things. I get that people like that form of story telling because it makes them feel important. What I can't understand is that people always want that form of story. It is like you want to see nothing but Rambo and can't watch Platoon because there's no one being "proactive" and winning the war on their own.

DA2 is flawed but the "hero" not being the lone wolf world historical spirit isn't one of them. That was something that was a bold choice and it worked on that level alone.

The problem is that Hawke is presented as all those things- the hero, the leader, the prime mover- in everything but major plot points where she could have acted in that fashion and inexplicably can't.  It's fine if people want to roleplay a character who cares about nothing more than crashing parties and playing dirty templar with Anders or count-the-corpses with Fenris and then *oops* world war, but for people who wanted a bit more range than that, the game is severely limited.

Totally agree.

[Cobra's_back]

Sidney wrote...


Again, what you want is cookie cutter exposition where you, the hero, are the leader and prime mover of things. I get that people like that form of story telling because it makes them feel important. What I can't understand is that people always want that form of story. It is like you want to see nothing but Rambo and can't watch Platoon because there's no one being "proactive" and winning the war on their own.

DA2 is flawed but the "hero" not being the lone wolf world historical spirit isn't one of them. That was something that was a bold choice and it worked on that level alone.

Sidney,


Bio Ware didn’t advertise the tragic romance novel type hero that has no control of his surroundings. They used words like “your rise to power”, “an entire decade and shapes itself around every decision you make”, and “think like a general”. If they would have advertised a “tragic flawed type hero” or the “possible love triangle” (Fenris, Hawke and Anders) player’s expectations would have been different. They may have actually attracted more players. I can’t say for sure. What I can say is the description of the game in my opinion does not fit the game. I personally like the rise to real power think like a general and don’t need a Twilight love story.
This is the exact wording from Bio Ware’s site:
This is the story of how the world changed forever. The legend of your “Rise to Power” begins now.
Key Features: Embark upon an all-new adventure that takes place across “an entire decade and shapes itself around every decision you make”.
Determine your rise to power from a destitute refugee to the revered champion of the land.
“Think like a general” and fight like a Spartan with dynamic new combat mechanics that put you right in the heart of battle whether you are a mage, rogue, or warrior.
Go deeper into the world of Dragon Age with an entirely new cinematic experience that grabs hold of you from the beginning and never lets go.
Discover a whole realm rendered in stunning detail with updated graphics and a new visual style.
 
I never played Mass Effect 2. Is that the game for someone who likes to think like a general?

[casedawgz]

Think like a general obviously refers to issuing commands to your allies in combat. You're confusing your taglines.

[TEWR]

it would've been nice if I actually could issue commands to other people that aren't my companions though, like a general.

Especially for the pro-mage side of the endgame where there's a perfect way to funnel the Templars into being bombarded by fireballs and other stuff, while mages could launch Fireballs, Firestorms, and Tempests into the sky in an effort to destroy the Templar ships that were coming.

[Cobra's_back]

casedawgz wrote...

Think like a general obviously refers to issuing commands to your allies in combat. You're confusing your taglines.

\\

Okay, How about "an entire decade and shapes itself around every decision you make”. I'm new to this. I really want a game that allows more decisions. What does that mean? Is that Mass Effect 2?

[Sharn01]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Sharn01 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...


fun fact: Mages can join the Ben-Hassrath, but they're watched very carefully.

Source please, I am unfamiliar with this, and since I am very familiar with DA lore I would assume that Hawke, and many citizens in Andrastian societies who know only a small fraction of what I know would be even more inclined to believe that all Qunari mages are chained and treated in the same way as Saarebas.

I also thought the Ben-Hassrath where the qunari brainwashers, I mean reeducators.

It was confirmed by one of the devs. Mary Kirby I believe. But it does explain why Taarbas says a Mage Hawke can be Ben-Hassrath.

Makes me wonder if the qunari use magic to help reeducate members who have gotten out of line if that is the case,  they send people away to be reeducated for anything that does not fit the qun, from falling in love to wishing to perform a different job.  It still does nothing to disprove that mages would be treated as a saarebas, working for the ben-hassrath does not exclude such treatment.

[AlexXIV]

casedawgz wrote...

Think like a general obviously refers to issuing commands to your allies in combat. You're confusing your taglines.

Ok, a general commands ... 3, 4, 5 people? Just curious because I could have been thinking like a general without even noticing it!

[AlexXIV]

ghostbusters101 wrote...

Sidney wrote...


Again, what you want is cookie cutter exposition where you, the hero, are the leader and prime mover of things. I get that people like that form of story telling because it makes them feel important. What I can't understand is that people always want that form of story. It is like you want to see nothing but Rambo and can't watch Platoon because there's no one being "proactive" and winning the war on their own.

DA2 is flawed but the "hero" not being the lone wolf world historical spirit isn't one of them. That was something that was a bold choice and it worked on that level alone.

Sidney,


Bio Ware didn’t advertise the tragic romance novel type hero that has no control of his surroundings. They used words like “your rise to power”, “an entire decade and shapes itself around every decision you make”, and “think like a general”. If they would have advertised a “tragic flawed type hero” or the “possible love triangle” (Fenris, Hawke and Anders) player’s expectations would have been different. They may have actually attracted more players. I can’t say for sure. What I can say is the description of the game in my opinion does not fit the game. I personally like the rise to real power think like a general and don’t need a Twilight love story.
This is the exact wording from Bio Ware’s site:
This is the story of how the world changed forever. The legend of your “Rise to Power” begins now.
Key Features: Embark upon an all-new adventure that takes place across “an entire decade and shapes itself around every decision you make”.
Determine your rise to power from a destitute refugee to the revered champion of the land.
“Think like a general” and fight like a Spartan with dynamic new combat mechanics that put you right in the heart of battle whether you are a mage, rogue, or warrior.
Go deeper into the world of Dragon Age with an entirely new cinematic experience that grabs hold of you from the beginning and never lets go.
Discover a whole realm rendered in stunning detail with updated graphics and a new visual style.
 
I never played Mass Effect 2. Is that the game for someone who likes to think like a general?

It's not really just that. I could have enjoyed a tragic, romantic story with a hero that fails. But that's not even in DA2. At best a frail attempt. Unless you count the death of your sibling in the prologue or your old mother being turned into a frankenstein monster. It's actually more like a parody to RPGs. I mean you don't even know if you should laugh or cry most of the time.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 16 octobre 2011 - 08:33 .

[casedawgz]

Wow, people take these marketing taglines so literally. Its like they expected the game to secretly be an RTS.