703 réponses à ce sujet

[ThePasserby]

Anyroad2 wrote...

ThePasserby wrote...

Anyroad2 wrote...

ThePasserby wrote...

You sound like you've not played Balder's Gate 2's expansion.

Good, because I havent.

That disqualifies you from deciding what is or is not possible with BW's games, doesn't it?

Does it?
I didnt realize that I needed to have played a decade old game not related to this series lore-wise in order to determine whats possible in this series or not.

Youre just being elitist, if you think that I do. : )

I'm not being elitist, merely putting you in your place

The game I mentioned actually had NPCs reload when they lost a fight with my PC. And haven't we heard ad nauseum from BW that the DA series is Balder's Gate's spiritual successor?

And besides, never played BG, huh? You must be one of BW's "new audience".

[Sunnie]

Chewin3 wrote...

Sunnie22 wrote...
Not really, everyone seems to be overcomplicating things, and reading things between the lines that just may not be there.

Tallis is not on a mission for the Qun, she is on a personal mission for herself, trying to keep a lot of innocent people from being systematically slaughtered. Listen to her dialog a little closer and you will understand that the list of "sleeper agents" includes their families, those who have left the Qun, and their companions.

Not too complicated to me, I gladly let her take the list to keep it out of the Chantry and Orlisian hands.

Perhaps, but the term "innocent people" really goes over my head. Those "innocents" could be Qunari spies. And the fact that she states that they may have "families, and some aren't of the Qun" -- argument I really don't get. Didn't she earlier say that guards had families too? Does that make them "innocent" then? And I can't really trust her with such a dangerous list, considering it would be better if she just destroyed the scroll if she really wanted to protect them.

Again...overcomplicating it. Take what she says at face value and stop reading stuff into it. Gaurds could be innocent, they are just doing a job to support their families, are they not? If one is a bit over zealous in thier duties then I'd say not innocent, but until that behaviour is displayed you can't say they are not.

[upsettingshorts]

Addai67 wrote...

But she doesn't do everything she can.  That is the point.  At crucial, inexplicable moments, Hawke stands there with a vacant stare or a cute one-liner, and direct lines from those dip**** moments can be drawn to the disasters of Kirkwall and Thedas.

I find the fact people attribute this as something unique to Hawke weird.

Did none of you ever want to do something your Warden inexplicably could not do?  How about your Spirit Monk?  Or your Revan?  Or your Shepard?  I certainly have.  I mean, maybe the story in DAO only offered you choices you wanted to take and didn't withhold any you didn't, but that doesn't mean that's how it worked for everyone, or that it would be impossible for anyone to have played DA2 and experienced none of the disconnect this thread claims is self-evident.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 14 octobre 2011 - 09:14 .

[leggywillow]

ThePasserby wrote...
And you have succeeded at one thing too: missing the point. You said Hawke accomplishes his/her goals. So unless Hawke's goal is to have his mother murdered, he failed didn't he?

I think we can say that most people's goal is to prevent the murder of their loved ones, but when it does happen we don't usually point to the victim's relatives and call them "FAILURES!", do we?  Unless this is a purely semantic argument.

[Anyroad2]

ThePasserby wrote...

And you have succeeded at one thing too: missing the point. You said Hawke accomplishes his/her goals. So unless Hawke's goal is to have his mother murdered, he failed didn't he?

And talk about Mary Sue, sorry, Hawke can't be her, as Tallis has already taken up that role.

Using the situation with Leandra against Hawke, is like (as Ive said before) using a fatal car crash against the victims loved ones. The loved ones wish that they could have prevented that person from crashing and being killed, but it was totaly out of their hands. If you use this against Hawke you need to use this against every Warden. People die in every Origin. Theres nothing that could have been done about that.

Theres nothing Hawke could have done to prevent Leandra from being killed. When he found out that she had gone missing and the "white lillys" thing, it was to late.

[ThePasserby]

Sunnie22 wrote...


Again...overcomplicating it. Take what she says at face value and stop reading stuff into it. Gaurds could be innocent, they are just doing a job to support their families, are they not? If one is a bit over zealous in thier duties then I'd say not innocent, but until that behaviour is displayed you can't say they are not.

Ah ... taking whatever NPCs say at face value. That does make playing a dumb Hawke, which is likely the writers' intent, much easier, I'll agree.

[ThePasserby]

leggywillow wrote...

ThePasserby wrote...
And you have succeeded at one thing too: missing the point. You said Hawke accomplishes his/her goals. So unless Hawke's goal is to have his mother murdered, he failed didn't he?

I think we can say that most people's goal is to prevent the murder of their loved ones, but when it does happen we don't usually point to the victim's relatives and call them "FAILURES!", do we?  Unless this is a purely semantic argument.

Semantic's aren't trivial. When one claims that Hawke accomplishes all his goals, then it is a small step to claim then that Hawke isn't ineffectual.

[upsettingshorts]

A Hawke that is overcome by events seems to be the writer's intent.

Sometimes it works, like Leandra being killed. Sometimes it's a clumsy mess, like not being able to turn Anders in to Cullen after his plans start to become clear.

The argument that a protagonist that is overcome by events makes him bad just doesn't ring true for me. Though, "I really don't want to play a protagonist who is overcome by events" is fair to say, as long as those same people don't insult people who do enjoy it for their liking a "dumb" character.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 14 octobre 2011 - 09:18 .

[ThePasserby]

Anyroad2 wrote...

ThePasserby wrote...

And you have succeeded at one thing too: missing the point. You said Hawke accomplishes his/her goals. So unless Hawke's goal is to have his mother murdered, he failed didn't he?

And talk about Mary Sue, sorry, Hawke can't be her, as Tallis has already taken up that role.

Using the situation with Leandra against Hawke, is like (as Ive said before) using a fatal car crash against the victims loved ones. The loved ones wish that they could have prevented that person from crashing and being killed, but it was totaly out of their hands. If you use this against Hawke you need to use this against every Warden. People die in every Origin. Theres nothing that could have been done about that.

Theres nothing Hawke could have done to prevent Leandra from being killed. When he found out that she had gone missing and the "white lillys" thing, it was to late.

I knew something was up when Leandra mentioned she had a lover, who often sent her flowers. And I didn't have more information than Hawke, as I saw everything about the case through his eyes, so it's not yet another "dramatic irony". So, once more, dumb Hawke, dead mum.

[upsettingshorts]

ThePasserby wrote...

I knew something was up when Leandra mentioned she had a lover, who often sent her flowers. And I didn't have more information than Hawke, as I saw everything about the case through his eyes, so it's not yet another "dramatic irony". So, once more, dumb Hawke, dead mum.

That's because you're genre savvy about foreshadowing.

A man sending a woman he is courting flowers is quite possibly the most common move in the book.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 14 octobre 2011 - 09:22 .

[Drogothor]

Hawke is a tool. One who wins most of the battles but ultimately not the wars. But then why would s/he be such a sardonic wit if everything went his/her way? Such is the life of a poor non-warden protagonist in the DA Universe. Maybe s/he will be redeemed in DA3 for such p-poor ends in DA2 despite more than adequate means and (perhaps) the best intentions.

[Wulfram]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

I find the fact people attribute this as something unique to Hawke weird.

Did none of you ever want to do something your Warden inexplicably could not do?  How about your Spirit Monk?  Or your Revan?  Or your Shepard?  I certainly have.  I mean, maybe the story in DAO only offered you choices you wanted to take and didn't withhold any you didn't, but that doesn't mean that's how it worked for everyone, or that it would be impossible for anyone to have played DA2 and experienced none of the disconnect this thread claims is self-evident.

It's a bigger issue because Hawke's inaction has big consequences.  Whereas the bits of railroading might be annoying in Origins, but they don't generally result in loads of people dieing.

edit: I'd also say that there were more occasions when you could make some meaningful decisions, which helps you forgive the ones you don't get.

Modifié par Wulfram, 14 octobre 2011 - 09:25 .

[Anyroad2]

ThePasserby wrote...

Anyroad2 wrote...

ThePasserby wrote...

Anyroad2 wrote...

ThePasserby wrote...

You sound like you've not played Balder's Gate 2's expansion.

Good, because I havent.

That disqualifies you from deciding what is or is not possible with BW's games, doesn't it?

Does it?
I didnt realize that I needed to have played a decade old game not related to this series lore-wise in order to determine whats possible in this series or not.

Youre just being elitist, if you think that I do. : )

I'm not being elitist, merely putting you in your place

The game I mentioned actually had NPCs reload when they lost a fight with my PC. And haven't we heard ad nauseum from BW that the DA series is Balder's Gate's spiritual successor?

And besides, never played BG, huh? You must be one of BW's "new audience".

I just didnt play PC games back then. 
I was too busy playing, KOTOR, KOTOR2, Jade Empire, and other highly praised RPGs like Morrowind.

Also accourding to dictionary.com an elitist is:

1. a person having, thought to have, or professing superior intellect or
talent, power, wealth, or membership in the upper echelons of society.

2. a person who believes in the superiority of an elitist class.


The stance your taking about how me not playing BG2 somehow makes me inferior to you (or anyone whos played that game) seems to fit that description nicely.

[ThePasserby]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

But she doesn't do everything she can.  That is the point.  At crucial, inexplicable moments, Hawke stands there with a vacant stare or a cute one-liner, and direct lines from those dip**** moments can be drawn to the disasters of Kirkwall and Thedas.

I find the fact people attribute this as something unique to Hawke weird.

Did none of you ever want to do something your Warden inexplicably could not do?  How about your Spirit Monk?  Or your Revan?  Or your Shepard?  I certainly have.  I mean, maybe the story in DAO only offered you choices you wanted to take and didn't withhold any you didn't, but that doesn't mean that's how it worked for everyone, or that it would be impossible for anyone to have played DA2 and experienced none of the disconnect this thread claims is self-evident.

Simple. The Warden stopped the Blight, which outweighs all his other failures. Therefore, not ineffectual. Can't say the same for Hawke.

I'd like to quote Robert Downey Jr in Tropic Thunder: "Hawke went full retard. Never go full retard."

[HAM Hawke]

ThePasserby wrote...

Anyroad2 wrote...

ThePasserby wrote...

You sound like you've not played Balder's Gate 2's expansion.

Good, because I havent.

That disqualifies you from deciding what is or is not possible with BW's games, doesn't it?

Oh wow..... I was wondering why this post was gaining so many hits.  ThePiss...er..um Passerby in here hating on Hawke agin I see....Why don't you start a "Hawke is so stupid I wish I never bought this game" thread so you can get your rocks off with people who actually care for your opinion....

Now back to the main post....Hawke is a bystander in this whole DA2 situation...With out the fateful or chance meeting with Flemeth there is no Mage Templar war....Just a mass murder in a boxed in city called Kirkwall....So to say he is ineffectual as a protagonist is not cool....He actually tried to make chicken salad out of chicken "you know what"....How many other cowards in Kirkwall would have had the "nugs" to stand up to Meredith or the Arishock?..................... 

[upsettingshorts]

Wulfram wrote...

It's a bigger issue because Hawke's inaction has big consequences.

The big consequences are the whole point of the story.  If Hawke could prevent the endgame, the entire fabric of Thedas is changed.  It would be like if the Warden could finish DAO without stopping the Blight.  It would be impossible for BioWare to even attempt to maintain continuity through something like that.

So we're back to "I just didn't like DA2's story that much."  Which is fine.  

[ThePasserby]

Anyroad2 wrote...

ThePasserby wrote...



I'm not being elitist, merely putting you in your place

The game I mentioned actually had NPCs reload when they lost a fight with my PC. And haven't we heard ad nauseum from BW that the DA series is Balder's Gate's spiritual successor?

And besides, never played BG, huh? You must be one of BW's "new audience".

I just didnt play PC games back then. 
I was too busy playing, KOTOR, KOTOR2, Jade Empire, and other highly praised RPGs like Morrowind.

Also accourding to dictionary.com an elitist is:

1. a person having, thought to have, or professing superior intellect or
talent, power, wealth, or membership in the upper echelons of society.

2. a person who believes in the superiority of an elitist class.


The stance your taking about how me not playing BG2 somehow makes me inferior to you (or anyone whos played that game) seems to fit that description nicely.

Alright, guilty as charged. I'm still putting you in your place.

You thought you knew what was possible in BW games, I've shown you your error.

[leggywillow]

ThePasserby wrote...
Semantic's aren't trivial. When one claims that Hawke accomplishes all his goals, then it is a small step to claim then that Hawke isn't ineffectual.

I don't know, I think I'd claim that semantics are pretty trivial, or at least misleading, in this case.  I'm assuming that whoever originally claimed Hawke "accomplished all his goals" wasn't including things that are beyond the ability of any human to predict and prevent.

[ThePasserby]

HAM Hawke wrote...

ThePasserby wrote...

Anyroad2 wrote...

ThePasserby wrote...

You sound like you've not played Balder's Gate 2's expansion.

Good, because I havent.

That disqualifies you from deciding what is or is not possible with BW's games, doesn't it?

Oh wow..... I was wondering why this post was gaining so many hits.  ThePiss...er..um Passerby in here hating on Hawke agin I see....Why don't you start a "Hawke is so stupid I wish I never bought this game" thread so you can get your rocks off with people who actually care for your opinion....

Thanks for demonstrating your mental acquity, or lack thereof.

[upsettingshorts]

ThePasserby wrote...

Simple. The Warden stopped the Blight, which outweighs all his other failures. Therefore, not ineffectual. Can't say the same for Hawke.

Your arguments are so arbitrary that arguing with them is pointless.  You'll just invent new standards and move the goalposts again.

ThePasserby wrote...

I'd like to quote Robert Downey Jr in Tropic Thunder: "Hawke went full retard. Never go full retard."

That's just retarded. 

Not only does it miss the distinction his character was making between characters like Forrest Gump and I am Sam, it equates ineffectual with retarded, and those aren't even close to being in the same ballpark.  

ThePasserby wrote...

Thanks for demonstrating your mental acquity, or lack thereof.

Acuity. 

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 14 octobre 2011 - 09:31 .

[ThePasserby]

leggywillow wrote...

ThePasserby wrote...
Semantic's aren't trivial. When one claims that Hawke accomplishes all his goals, then it is a small step to claim then that Hawke isn't ineffectual.

I don't know, I think I'd claim that semantics are pretty trivial, or at least misleading, in this case.  I'm assuming that whoever originally claimed Hawke "accomplished all his goals" wasn't including things that are beyond the ability of any human to predict and prevent.

I disagree. Words have meaning, unless, of course, you wield them like a sledgehammer.

[upsettingshorts]

ThePasserby wrote...

I disagree. Words have meaning, unless, of course, you wield them like a sledgehammer.

Words have meaning especially if you wield them like a sledgehammer.

[Anyroad2]

ThePasserby wrote...

Anyroad2 wrote...

ThePasserby wrote...



I'm not being elitist, merely putting you in your place

The game I mentioned actually had NPCs reload when they lost a fight with my PC. And haven't we heard ad nauseum from BW that the DA series is Balder's Gate's spiritual successor?

And besides, never played BG, huh? You must be one of BW's "new audience".

I just didnt play PC games back then. 
I was too busy playing, KOTOR, KOTOR2, Jade Empire, and other highly praised RPGs like Morrowind.

Also accourding to dictionary.com an elitist is:

1. a person having, thought to have, or professing superior intellect or
talent, power, wealth, or membership in the upper echelons of society.

2. a person who believes in the superiority of an elitist class.


The stance your taking about how me not playing BG2 somehow makes me inferior to you (or anyone whos played that game) seems to fit that description nicely.

Alright, guilty as charged. I'm still putting you in your place.

You thought you knew what was possible in BW games, I've shown you your error.

You havent though.

Just because something like that happend in one older game, doesnt mean its going to happen in future games.
If you could bring up more examples of this happening then you might have a stronger point because then it would be more normal and less of a supreme rarity.

[Chewin]

Sunnie22 wrote...
Again...overcomplicating it. Take what she says at face value and stop reading stuff into it.

Are you implying that I should instead just stand idle and wait for everything to fall into place in due time?

Sorry, but if you're gonna be stating something like that, I can't take this argument seriously.

[mesmerizedish]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Not only does it miss the distinction his character was making between characters like Forrest Gump and I am Sam, it equates ineffectual with retarded, and those aren't even close to being in the same ballpark.

It ain't the same league. It ain't even the same f*cking sport.

Come on 'Shorts, let's get into character.