703 respuestas en este tema

[Mr.House]

ThePasserby wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

ThePasserby wrote...

It is puzzling why some find it fun to play a protagonist as inept as Hawke.

My Hawke wasn't a bystander, he was a guy who tried and failed to maintain the peace and do what he thought was the right thing.

Would I want to play that character all the time?  Probably not.  But the fact is "the hero who saves the day" is 100% of other game protagonists, it was a nice change.

If you know that DA3 will be another "hero" as inconsequential as Hawke, will you buy and play it?

Yup.

[ThePasserby]

Fauxnormal wrote...

This. I'll take Hawke over some boring, bland, do-everything-perfect hero any day. Why? Because Hawke is human, and (well, depending on how you play), doing their best to make something good out of a set of really ****ty circumstances. A hero is someone who tries to help, tries to fix, tries to save. A hero is NOT nessicarily someone who pulls it off all the time.

The point of the game is and was to be dark and gritty; that sometimes, no matter what you do, things go downhill anyway. People are annoyed because they couldn't change the outcome of the game, but guess what? Sometimes, you CAN'T change the way things happen.

You enjoy being taken for a ride by Tallis, and not allowed to even respond, I gather?

[jamesp81]

MigoTheGIgo wrote...

Leave Hawke alone :<

b09boy wrote...

-Mistakenly and unknowingly released the lyrium idol which all but creates the central antagonist and nearly destroys the city.
-Mistakenly and unknowingly helps Anders create a mage/templar civil war throughout Thedas.
-Mistakenly and unknowingly helps and even allows Corypheus to escape and likely infiltrate the Grey Wardens.
-Mistakenly
and unknowingly prevents a list of Qunari spies from being obtained,
likely making the eventual qunari invasion all the worse.

It was
annoying at first, but this has gotten to be just comical. I have to
wonder if Bioware even realizes what a joke Hawke is.  I'm not sure I've ever seen an RPG character railroaded so much into being a complete stooge or stepstool for other characters to walk all over.

Perhaps the lesson from this game is "Sometimes, life gives you crap, and all you can do is try not to be swallowed up by it". Which is an entirely valid lesson. There is a difference between being a hero and being a god. Guess which one Hawke is ^^ 

People don't indulge in entertainment for life lessons or to be preached to.

Don't get me wrong, I like the game.  I like Hawke for that matter and I hope he makes a showing in DA3.  With that said, DA2 underperformed in the market place for a few reasons, and this is one of them.  People like heroic, pro-active protagonists, not oblivious reactive protagonists.

Ironically, there is a parade of people on the ME3 side of this forum begging for Shepard to get the same treatment Hawke did in DA2.  I suspect Bioware knows better than that.

[CheeseEnchilada]

I've always thought that was the point. While the Warden took charge and played a typical RPG hero, uniting the lands and saving the kingdom, Hawke sort of stumbled into things that were out of his/her control. It doesn't make Hawke a joke; sometimes there are struggles that one person simply can't solve. The Warden got lucky with a black-white scenario against the darkspawn (arguably made a bit more gray by the Architect), but Hawke ended up having to deal with a political struggle and moral argument that had been building for years, making it a bit more diffcult to play what we think of as a hero archetype.

Do I wish Hawke could have succeeded a bit more, and not failed every main quest? Yes. But it's nice to take a break from a Warden or a Shepard once in a while, and play a character who isn't so special. I'm not sure I'd like to do it again, especially at this magnitude, but I understand why they did it, and I enjoy it for what it is.

[jamesp81]

Fauxnormal wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

I wouldn't be bothered so much if my Hawke could *try* not to fail. (call out Larius on being possessed just for him to get away, try to get the scroll just for elf chick to run away).

But as it is. Meh.

Stop. Metagaming.

Just because YOU, the PLAYER, have the suspcion that Larius was possessed IN NO WAY means that Hawke had any way of knowing, proving, or even guessing at it. Yes, okay, so to make you supa-happy, the game could have given you the option to kill Larius.

But honestly? There's no in-game reason to do so unless you're a jerk. because, IN GAME, Hawke has no way to prove or know that Larius is possessed. None.

We all need to get the "metagaming = bad" stick out of our asses.  Every single RPG is metagamed, every single time.  Deal with it.

[upsettingshorts]

jamesp81 wrote...

Ironically, there is a parade of people on the ME3 side of this forum begging for Shepard to get the same treatment Hawke did in DA2.  I suspect Bioware knows better than that.

If you're referring to the folks saying that "hey, sometimes those genre-savvy Paragon decisions should blow in Shepard's face" those people are absolutely right.

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Dramatic irony makes many players rage.

Certainly the 1st person gamers, it contradicts their approach to be shown any perspective beyond the protagonist's.

3rd person gamers appreciate dramatic irony as a narrative device that enhances the story.

The playstyles are not compatible.

[ThePasserby]

Mr.House wrote...

ThePasserby wrote...

If you know that DA3 will be another "hero" as inconsequential as Hawke, will you buy and play it?

Yup.

I'll assume that was an honest answer. And if so, you are the class of players I mentioned, who enjoy playing bystanders while NPCs walk all over you. Good luck.

[upsettingshorts]

jamesp81 wrote...

We all need to get the "metagaming = bad" stick out of our asses.

No we don't.

jamesp81 wrote...

Every single RPG is metagamed, every single time.  Deal with it.

Not if I can help it.

[jamesp81]

ThePasserby wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

ThePasserby wrote...

It is puzzling why some find it fun to play a protagonist as inept as Hawke.

My Hawke wasn't a bystander, he was a guy who tried and failed to maintain the peace and do what he thought was the right thing.

Would I want to play that character all the time?  Probably not.  But the fact is "the hero who saves the day" is 100% of other game protagonists, it was a nice change.

If you know that DA3 will be another "hero" as inconsequential as Hawke, will you buy and play it?

Speaking for myself, no.  I'm OK with it in DA2 because DA2 isn't the end of the story.  If DA3 is the end of the story, then this kind of writing is unacceptable to a good narrative.

[b09boy]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

I agree with MigoTheGIgo. Hawke's story is about trying to deal with the chaotic circumstances that (s)he is surrounded by/entangled in.

By failing constantly?

@OP - Regarding your list, those are situtations that the player has knowledge of, whereas Hawke may not have the same perspective or scope. And while all incidents listed have the potential for Thedas-shaking events to come, even the most innocent and simple act could start a domino effect toward something equal. Let's say that one minor character that survives a battle or is spared by Hawke winds up playing a vital role in the DA-verse chapters to come (for good or for ill). It simply remains to be seen how things will shake out.

So your argument to Hawke being ineffectual and even counter-productive is that s/he didn't know better.  Doesn't really stop Hawke from being ineffectual and even counter-productive.

Mr.House wrote...

By this logic then Izzy, Varric, Betrand, Jeneka and Tallis can also be blamed.

Yeah, for individual incidents.  Not for all of them.  Also, Isabela really didn't care and Tallis succeeded in doing what she came to do.

Fauxnormal wrote...

This. I'll take Hawke over some
boring, bland, do-everything-perfect hero any day. Why? Because Hawke is
human, and (well, depending on how you play), doing their best to make
something good out of a set of really ****ty circumstances. A hero is
someone who tries to help, tries to fix, tries to save. A hero is NOT
nessicarily someone who pulls it off all the time.

Really?  I don't recall many medals of honor being given out to people who failed or made situations worse.

The point of
the game is and was to be dark and gritty; that sometimes, no matter
what you do, things go downhill anyway. People are annoyed because they
couldn't change the outcome of the game, but guess what? Sometimes, you
CAN'T change the way things happen.

Sure you can.  If you were smart enough to read between the lines, research, follow up on events, or just try as opposed to...well...not...then I'd say there's a pretty decent chance things might turn out a slight bit different.

[upsettingshorts]

ThePasserby wrote...

And if so, you are the class of players I mentioned, who enjoy playing bystanders while NPCs walk all over you. Good luck.

You're the class of poster who makes me hate the BSN. 

[jamesp81]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

Ironically, there is a parade of people on the ME3 side of this forum begging for Shepard to get the same treatment Hawke did in DA2.  I suspect Bioware knows better than that.

If you're referring to the folks saying that "hey, sometimes those genre-savvy Paragon decisions should blow in Shepard's face" those people are absolutely right.

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Dramatic irony makes many players rage.

Certainly the 1st person gamers, it contradicts their approach to be shown any perspective beyond the protagonist's.

3rd person gamers appreciate dramatic irony as a narrative device that enhances the story.

The playstyles are not compatible.

Those weren't the ones I was thinking of, no.  Or it might be some of the same people, but not because of their paragon-should-not-always-win position.

Editado por jamesp81, 14 octubre 2011 - 05:59 .

[ThePasserby]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

ThePasserby wrote...

And if so, you are the class of players I mentioned, who enjoy playing bystanders while NPCs walk all over you. Good luck.

You're the class of poster who makes me hate the BSN. 

Then you won't need me to show you the door.

[Lady_Aescwyn]

I think this is the brilliant difference/contrast between the Warden and Hawke.

The Warden IS the hero that changes the world. Every descision the Warden makes changes the world around him/her. Those descisions may not always turn out the way the Warden wanted (ex. a goody-two-shoes Warden picking Harrowmont), but the Warden knows that s/he is in a position to change things for better or worse and that every choice s/he make will have lasting consequences.

By contrast, Hawke is just a (fairly) normal wo/man struggling to stay afloat in the very chaos that the Warden is fighting. The Warden has a mission: Build an army. Stop the Blight. Save the world. Hawke's mission? Survive.
Hawke doen't realize how far-reaching his/her descisions are. That's what surprises Cassandra so much at the end of the game. She wanted someone to blame for everything that has happened and she went into the interrogation of Varric already believing that Hawke did everything s/he did on purpose. When is is revealed that everything was a crazy conga line of unforseen mistakes, Cassandra is clearly distressed because everything she believed was completely wrong.

Now she needs to find Hawke and hope that the Champion of Kirkewall can set everything right again.

I'm thinking that, come Dragon age 3, Hawke will take up the mantle of the Hero. After stumbling through the second game and unintentionally fascilitating a war, Hawke will step up Warden/Shepard style and put the smackdown on the mage-templar war. This time, there won't be so many of the mistaken, unintentional descisions.

Editado por Lady_Aescwyn, 14 octubre 2011 - 06:00 .

[Fauxnormal]

ThePasserby wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

ThePasserby wrote...

And if so, you are the class of players I mentioned, who enjoy playing bystanders while NPCs walk all over you. Good luck.

You're the class of poster who makes me hate the BSN. 

Then you won't need me to show you the door.

I think we'd most all of us rather it be you who left. Don't let it hit you on the way- oh, wait, do. I'd laugh.

[Fauxnormal]

bo9boy- you have one idea of a hero, and a black and white idea of the world.

People like you irritate me.

[jamesp81]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

We all need to get the "metagaming = bad" stick out of our asses.

No we don't.

jamesp81 wrote...

Every single RPG is metagamed, every single time.  Deal with it.

Not if I can help it.

Sorry, but yes we do.  It is not physically possible to not have some element of meta-gaming.  That has never happened, no matter how hard people try.  It will continue to never happen, no matter how hard people will try.

It's a fact of life for these kinds of games.  The smart thing to do is write the narrative with that in mind, and not pretend it doesn't exist.

[ThePasserby]

Fauxnormal wrote...

ThePasserby wrote...

It is puzzling why some find it fun to play a protagonist as inept as Hawke.

I can understand the writers favouring certain NPCs over the PC and have them pull a fast one on Hawke. Not a qaulity I'd admire on a game writer, but understandable. But why players enjoy playing a bystander is beyond me.

That's your own problem. Don't play. Bye!

That's right. I won't buy the next DA game. Bye!

[ThePasserby]

Fauxnormal wrote...

bo9boy- you have one idea of a hero, and a black and white idea of the world.

People like you irritate me.

Oh and you are so endearing, aren't you?

[Fauxnormal]

I don't care about your opinion of me, and I don't care what you do and don't buy. So. Uh. Okay?

[adneate]

MigoTheGIgo wrote...
Perhaps the lesson from this game is "Sometimes, life gives you crap, and all you can do is try not to be swallowed up by it". Which is an entirely valid lesson.

A vaild lesson but is it a valid premise for an action / adventure game? I don't think it is since the point of these games is to do and experience things that are outside normal everday life, to be in a world where you can make big risky decisions with consequences but not ones as permenant as real life. If you strip that out that sense of adventure and player agency you're left with just a sub-par movie story with bad pacing, between going through DA2's nigh incomprehensible main plot with tons of pointless combat filler or just watching a movie I'd just watch the movie. The story in a good movie doesn't stop for 45 minutes so people can yell and kill things with no context or emotional investment on the part of audience. Which is essenitally what the constant nightime ninja gank squads are pointless, undramatic, visually exhausting filler that serves no purpose than to drag the simple act of going from point A to point B to an utterly frustrating crawl.

DA2's problem is just nothing has any impact for good or bad, if siding with the Mages lead you to be overwhelmed by Templars and executed that would have been at least different from the Templar ending.  No matter who you side with you fight the same two boss battles and then leave . . . that's my problem with the game. It's not that I can't have everything work out it's that when I'm asked to make a big decision it's ultimately irrelevant to what I'm going to be doing next.

Choice A and Choice B both lead to Fight #256 which just sucks ass.

[Wulfram]

Lady_Aescwyn wrote...

I'm thinking that, come Dragon age 3, Hawke will take up the mantle of the Hero

Hawke isn't going to be the protagonist in DA3.

[upsettingshorts]

jamesp81 wrote...

Sorry, but yes we do.  It is not physically possible to not have some element of meta-gaming.  That has never happened, no matter how hard people try.  It will continue to never happen, no matter how hard people will try.

I didn't say I was 100% successful, but part of the reason I play these games is to put myself in the shoes of my character and make decisions based on what they know, and what they can predict, because to do otherwise isn't as much fun for me.

I mean, sometimes I engage genre savvy mode because I do not want to miss content, and I recognize that's metagaming - however, I wouldn't use that as a basis for criticism of a game protagonist because I'd be aware that is what I was doing.

jamesp81 wrote...

The smart thing to do is write the narrative with that in mind, and not pretend it doesn't exist.

No it isn't.

[upsettingshorts]

adneate wrote...

A vaild lesson but is it a valid premise for an action / adventure game? I don't think it is since the point of these games is to do and experience things that are outside normal everday life, to be in a world where you can make big risky decisions with consequences but not ones as permenant as real life

Sure, if you're playing a self-insert avatar and not roleplaying a character.

In case it isn't clear, the lesson intended by this post is to demonstrate that "the point of these games" varies from player to player.

Editado por Upsettingshorts, 14 octubre 2011 - 06:06 .

[ThePasserby]

Fauxnormal wrote...



I think we'd most all of us rather it be you who left. Don't let it hit you on the way- oh, wait, do. I'd laugh.

Oh I like it here. Go back and play Hawke if you don't like my presence.