272 réponses à ce sujet

[tmp7704]

Mr.House wrote...

I eould agree, if at least m,y Wardens that did not care for Ferelden could at least attempt to leave. You say it once to AListair and he throws a hissyfit that makes me want to punch him

I suppose just being able to bring it up at all is still a notch above total inability to do an equivalent of that in DA2 -- if the player wants to play Hawke who wishes to stay and fight rather than flee... then you can't even say that, if i remember right? Admittedly could've just missed it and it's there.

[Mr.House]

tmp7704 wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

I eould agree, if at least m,y Wardens that did not care for Ferelden could at least attempt to leave. You say it once to AListair and he throws a hissyfit that makes me want to punch him

I suppose just being able to bring it up at all is still a notch above total inability to do an equivalent of that in DA2 -- if the player wants to play Hawke who wishes to stay and fight rather than flee... then you can't even say that, if i remember right? Admittedly could've just missed it and it's there.

I will agree that you can not voice it in DA2 but I still would have liked to punch Alistair... MAKE IT HAPPEN TMP I kid I kid.

[tmp7704]

Mr.House wrote...

but I still would have liked to punch Alistair... MAKE IT HAPPEN TMP I kid I kid.

lol. Given there already is the "slap Morrigan" mod and how many people had various issues with Alistair daring to give them lip or worse... it's actually surprising there isn't one for him, too, when you think about it 

edit: oh and technically i did make the punch Alistair mod... although it's for the good cause at the roof of the Fort

Modifié par tmp7704, 23 octobre 2011 - 04:57 .

[Mr.House]

tmp7704 wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

but I still would have liked to punch Alistair... MAKE IT HAPPEN TMP I kid I kid.

lol. Given there already is the "slap Morrigan" mod and how many people had various issues with Alistair daring to give them lip or worse... it's actually surprising there isn't one for him, too, when you think about it 

*sigh* you can't even scare him by telling him Sten will rip his teddy bear apart

Modifié par Mr.House, 23 octobre 2011 - 04:58 .

[Joy Divison]

Mr.House wrote...

My Hawkes goal was simple. Get rich,. get powerful, party, have sex and just enjoy life.

That's the OP's point.  You created satisfying internal motivations that were independent of the game itself.

Modifié par Joy Divison, 23 octobre 2011 - 05:00 .

[TEWR]

Mr.House wrote...

People seem to forgot that there was more to expedition then just the treasure, shall I remind everyone that Hawke went deeper into the Deep Roads then anyone thought before, including the Wardens to the point where even the Wardesn where interested. Also the treasure they found insured Hawke would get a title and be untouchable by the Templars, which would have made them noticeable by the Viscount which would in turn with early Qunari contact a "partnership" with the Viscount.

DA2 was fine until Act 3. I shall now keep my mouth shut on Act 3 since I believe almost everyone can agree it was a disaster.

Personally I feel that Act 1 was too much of a jumbled assortment of quests with no semblance of any type of order and that Act 2 didn't connect enough with the actual points of the game that the players bought it for.

Act 1 and Act 2 -- while they had interesting plots on their own -- should've used those plots to connect to the larger story of the Mage-Templar conflict and Hawke's Rise to Power (the latter in more ways than it did).

While DAII was fine in the first 2 acts -- albeit the "prologue" was disappointing for me as well as the first year in Kirkwall -- it still wasn't what it should've been.

In my opinion of course.

[Mr.House]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

People seem to forgot that there was more to expedition then just the treasure, shall I remind everyone that Hawke went deeper into the Deep Roads then anyone thought before, including the Wardens to the point where even the Wardesn where interested. Also the treasure they found insured Hawke would get a title and be untouchable by the Templars, which would have made them noticeable by the Viscount which would in turn with early Qunari contact a "partnership" with the Viscount.

DA2 was fine until Act 3. I shall now keep my mouth shut on Act 3 since I believe almost everyone can agree it was a disaster.

Personally I feel that Act 1 was too much of a jumbled assortment of quests with no semblance of any type of order and that Act 2 didn't connect enough with the actual points of the game that the players bought it for.

Act 1 and Act 2 -- while they had interesting plots on their own -- should've used those plots to connect to the larger story of the Mage-Templar conflict and Hawke's Rise to Power (the latter in more ways than it did).

While DAII was fine in the first 2 acts -- albeit the "prologue" was disappointing for me as well as the first year in Kirkwall -- it still wasn't what it should've been.

In my opinion of course.

I like that you left out Act 3, you get twenty naked Oggy points.

[Zanallen]

In regards to Act I, I believe Bioware was paying homage to Baldur's Gate II. A large sequence of random quests with the express purpose of earning enough money to continue the story.

[TEWR]

Mr.House wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

People seem to forgot that there was more to expedition then just the treasure, shall I remind everyone that Hawke went deeper into the Deep Roads then anyone thought before, including the Wardens to the point where even the Wardesn where interested. Also the treasure they found insured Hawke would get a title and be untouchable by the Templars, which would have made them noticeable by the Viscount which would in turn with early Qunari contact a "partnership" with the Viscount.

DA2 was fine until Act 3. I shall now keep my mouth shut on Act 3 since I believe almost everyone can agree it was a disaster.

Personally I feel that Act 1 was too much of a jumbled assortment of quests with no semblance of any type of order and that Act 2 didn't connect enough with the actual points of the game that the players bought it for.

Act 1 and Act 2 -- while they had interesting plots on their own -- should've used those plots to connect to the larger story of the Mage-Templar conflict and Hawke's Rise to Power (the latter in more ways than it did).

While DAII was fine in the first 2 acts -- albeit the "prologue" was disappointing for me as well as the first year in Kirkwall -- it still wasn't what it should've been.

In my opinion of course.

I like that you left out Act 3, you get twenty naked Oggy points.

Yay! I'm saving them up for my naked, drunken Oghren riding a gorilla into battle cameo. Just 2480 more and I'll get that cameo!

But yea, Act 3 was really just the thing that highlighted the story's problems for me. It's like Voldemort. That which must not be named

*feels lame for making a Harry Pothead reference.*

*now feels awesome for calling him Harry Pothead*

*wanted to end this with another thingy in asterisks*

[TEWR]

Zanallen wrote...

In regards to Act I, I believe Bioware was paying homage to Baldur's Gate II. A large sequence of random quests with the express purpose of earning enough money to continue the story.

I'm sure that was something some people who played Baldur's Gate II liked, but I didn't. Probably because I never played BGII (or BG for that matter), but meh.

For me, looking at all those quests makes me go "So... which one should I do first?", and imo that's a fatal design flaw of DAII, however much it references another game.

[FedericoV]

In Exile wrote...

Why should I want to get dwarves and elves and not Orlesians? Why should I want mages and not more Wardens? Why should I want to save Ferelden instead of fortifying Kirkwall?

Once you become a Grey Warden those plot hooks are easy to buy. You are alone and hunted. You need allies and you have no connection with the other GW circles. The treaties are the only thing that Duncan has left you and the only tool you have. You search for dwarves and elves because the treaties have been signed with elves and dwarves. Then, it's such a familiar and archetype story structure (rally the races and the political groups to save the world from the big bad evil) that motivations became secondary. You can give them for granted once you buy the whole epic fantasy hook.

But that's just your subjective experience of the plot. I thought DA2 worked great for a laid back character disinterested in the mess that is Kirkwall and just looking to enjoy the lazy life of an Aristocrat while getting dragged into everyone's business. Just like DA:O works great for Wardens who want to save Ferelden, instead of fortifying Orlais.

It's not that subjective: the poor use of Hawke's family as the narrative hook of his rise to power is objective and that's the story they wanted to tell. And that's why it's a narrative failure. And without the personal side of the story, the politcal one simply lacks an unyfing theme (like save the world from the blight). The fact that the game can work for a lazy and cinic Hawke (at least untill the Black Ander's point) is just a secondary result of the lack of motivation and involvement for the main charachter and not a subjective result of player experiences.

That's a very good point, and it's part of what I'm getting at. Bioware does seem to view it as a game. 

Sorry, I've lost you there. Can you explain?

Modifié par FedericoV, 23 octobre 2011 - 01:30 .

[Apollo Starflare]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Zanallen wrote...

In regards to Act I, I believe Bioware was paying homage to Baldur's Gate II. A large sequence of random quests with the express purpose of earning enough money to continue the story.

I'm sure that was something some people who played Baldur's Gate II liked, but I didn't. Probably because I never played BGII (or BG for that matter), but meh.

For me, looking at all those quests makes me go "So... which one should I do first?", and imo that's a fatal design flaw of DAII, however much it references another game.

I disagree. Whilst Act 1 was flawed in that it should have connected even more with the greater plot rather than just hinting at everything, I liked that it was a 'pick your route' Act. It didn't just hark back to BG, it reminded me of any BioWare game where you pick the order you complete the areas in. The ability to change up when you do which quest (to a point) has allowed future playthroughs to feel more unique, despite the recycling. It also manages to feel like a natural progression of events no matter how I change things up. If you ask me it just takes some imagination, creating your own series of events that lead to the Deep Roads. I even think up stuff that went on 'off camera' (deleted scenes if you will) that further help explain why things happen in the order they do.

For me that's good design. Or one example of it anyway.

[Morroian]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

For me, looking at all those quests makes me go "So... which one should I do first?", and imo that's a fatal design flaw of DAII, however much it references another game.

Problem with that is it implies games like Oblivion, Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas and presumably Skyrim are fatally flawed.

[Rovay]

Apollo Starflare wrote...

I disagree. Whilst Act 1 was flawed in that it should have connected even more with the greater plot rather than just hinting at everything, I liked that it was a 'pick your route' Act. It didn't just hark back to BG, it reminded me of any BioWare game where you pick the order you complete the areas in. The ability to change up when you do which quest (to a point) has allowed future playthroughs to feel more unique, despite the recycling. It also manages to feel like a natural progression of events no matter how I change things up. If you ask me it just takes some imagination, creating your own series of events that lead to the Deep Roads. I even think up stuff that went on 'off camera' (deleted scenes if you will) that further help explain why things happen in the order they do.

For me that's good design. Or one example of it anyway.

... And here I thought that way of thinking was dead and forgotten on this forum. Especially the bolded part which I also carry on thinking into other two acts.

Thank you Apollo, for restoring my faith!

[Morroian]

Rovay wrote...

Apollo Starflare wrote...

I disagree. Whilst Act 1 was flawed in that it should have connected even more with the greater plot rather than just hinting at everything, I liked that it was a 'pick your route' Act. It didn't just hark back to BG, it reminded me of any BioWare game where you pick the order you complete the areas in. The ability to change up when you do which quest (to a point) has allowed future playthroughs to feel more unique, despite the recycling. It also manages to feel like a natural progression of events no matter how I change things up. If you ask me it just takes some imagination, creating your own series of events that lead to the Deep Roads. I even think up stuff that went on 'off camera' (deleted scenes if you will) that further help explain why things happen in the order they do.

For me that's good design. Or one example of it anyway.

... And here I thought that way of thinking was dead and forgotten on this forum. Especially the bolded part which I also carry on thinking into other two acts.

Thank you Apollo, for restoring my faith!

And to the point it is actually role playing. 

[nightscrawl]

----- POSSIBLE SPOILER WARNINGS -----

What an interesting topic!!

In Exile wrote...

Hawke did not have a particular motivation set out, beyond escaping from Lothering in the prologue and actually going on the Expedition in Act I. The years in-between the Acts were unfilled gaps, and its looking like they'll be left that way. Moreover, the kinds of things Hawke can do (and has to do!) are inconsistent (especially in Act I) and almost certainly arbitrary. It's not hard to walk away with the impression that there's no internally satisfying reason to finish the portions of the game labelled "main quest" other than they're the things you need to do to complete the game.

I've always felt that this was intentional on Bioware's part, regarding DA2 specifically. The DA2 website states "You are one of the few who escaped the destruction of your home. Now, forced to fight for survival in an ever-changing world, you must gather the deadliest of allies, amass fame and fortune, and seal your place in history. This is the story of how the world changed forever. The legend of your Rise to Power begins now." I've always taken that to mean -- and from what I've gathered playing DA2 several times -- that there really is no "end goal" for Hawke.

Hawke's immediate concern when you start the game is saving her family from the darkspawn. The two main things that follow (arriving at Kirkwall/serving out the one year, and then going onto the Deep Roads) are also directly related to that first immediate concern. All of the rest of the events after the Deep Roads happen as a result of everything you did in Act 1 trying to gather money for the expedition. Once you have made those connections in Act 1, everything else flows from there: companion relationships/conflicts, qunari problems, mage/templar issues. Basically, the story of Hawke's "rise to power" is essentially over by Act 2. You are a wealthy Kirkwall noble and have restored your family mansion. Now, anything else that happens you are just along for the ride. I don't necessarily see this as a bad thing, though I've seen many who say that this means Hawke is ineffectual.

Let's just take the Qunari conflict as it happens in Act 1. You first get involved with them because of Javaris, hoping to earn coin for the expedition. You meet the Arishok, learn about the Qunari and so forth. The next encounter is the bounty to save Saemus, which you also pick up to get some money, wherein you get even more info on the Qunari problem in Kirkwall. You could argue that until this point, there really is no personal interest for you at all other than making some money. Now in comes Petrice and Ketojan. We all know what happens there, and here is an example of Bioware inserting motivation. Petrice sets you up in a situation where you could have gotten killed. At this point, you have a personal stake in the Qunari issues, especially as they happen in Act 2 because Petrice treats you as a Qunari sympathizer.

In Exile wrote...

But consider this: ignoring how you've designed your character's personality in DA:O, there's nothing that happens at Ostagar that really requires you ever actually want to stop the Blight. In fact, to go one step further, unless you were the Dalish Warden there is nothing that requires you to even agree to become a Warden at all. When I say requires, I'm using it in the sense of how it was required for the Dalish Warden to become a Warden. Whereas every other PC, when saved by Duncan, could technically walk off into the sunset, the Dalish PC would die/become a ghoul doing so.

But let's say that you RP your character to only care about the issues in the origin, and have no opinion on the blight at all. Then there's absolutely no in-character reason to go with Duncan, to perform the Joining (other than Duncan threatening to kill you in both cases) or to go after the treaties. While DA:O is about ending the blight, you don't have to have to create a PC for the Origin that cares about this at all. If you don't, then DA:O fails in the same way DA2 fails to provide motivation.

Here is another way of looking at it in this case of Warden vs Blight: you have your Origin story and as a character you are solely focused on those issues, whether it be getting revenge on your brother Behlen for totally screwing you over, avenging your family, hoping all humans go to hell, or getting as far away from the circle as you can now that you are out of the tower. None of those really have any lasting repercussions. Yes, you could get revenge on whomever, but then what? Even if you don't care about the world you know being destroyed by the blight, you can choose to be part of an organization. The need to belong, which is something that many of the origins have after whatever events occur to the PC, is a strong motivation for many people. So, at that point, even if you don't really care about the blight in a larger sense, you're now a Grey Warden. What do Grey Wardens do? They fight darkspawn.

Also, I argue that the events of Ostagar are motivating. Loghain betrayed the king and the battle was lost. Disregarding whether you liked Duncan or the king or anyone else, you went up in that tower to light the signal and nothing happened after you did. You would have died if not for Flemeth. You might say that revenge alone could be a motivation for getting Loghain. Also, once you go to Lothering for the first time, you learn that Loghain says it was the Grey Wardens (you!) who betrayed the king and there is a bounty on your head(s).

In Exile wrote...

It comes down to this: it seems that Bioware expects players to invent the motivation to do things. This is, from what I've seen in their games, a core design philosophy of freedom. Remember, DA2 was supposed to be more 'free' than DA:O in that it lacked a primary antagonist. Well, that lack of unification just brought out this design element in detail: Bioware does not create in-character motivations.

To me, it all flows organically. I don't really have an issue with Bioware not statng that the PC has to feel this way or that way, because that eliminates some of the RP aspects that make these games so strong in the first place.

In Exile wrote...

Of course, this wouldn't be a problem if you could turn down quests (main quests, that is). But they're mandatory. They were mandatory in DA:O (had to get the elves, even if you thought they were useless/too much of a pain!), with the difference being that players just bought into the plot on the box better. But this is bad design.

I think you're asking a bit too much here really. There has to be some plot structure or there is no story. If there weren't mandatory plot building quests, it would just be a hack and slash game.

In Exile wrote...

If "I have to do this because the game tells me it will stop the Blight!" is good enough, then "I have to do to this because the game tells me it's how Hawke became Champion!" has to be equally good.

Sounds fine to me.

From the start of DAO you know that the main story issue is the Blight from Duncan's opening narration. You are supposed to care about that from the very first instance, even before you create your character. So as you play along, you know that the Blight/darkspawn/Archdemon is the final big bag guy, no matter what you will end up doing along the way.

DA2 of course has you wanting to see Hawke on her "rise to power." That is what we were told in the lead up to this game. So yes, that is the ultimate player motivation in playing DA2: to see how Hawke rises to power. Whether or not Hawke really had an impact (ie if the events would have unfolded the same way without her influence) does not matter. It doesn't matter because it's not the point of the game. Does Hawke have power, wealth, and influence by the end of the game? Yes. You saw it happen and played it out. The game succeeded in it's goal for the player.

[Fallstar]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

-In DA:O you have a choice of 6 prologues, and yes they DO matter later on. Anyone who's done the Orzammar plot line as a Dwarf noble can tell you that.

A few dialogue tweaks, a Dwarf recognizing how I saved his teacher's life or something, and an epilogue that might be considered hearsay and rumor.

Not in the capacity I would've preferred, but a little bit better than the rest of the Origin stories. I would've preferred to regain my place in the Memories and become king myself.

Its not just the dialogue tweaks, I found I bought into certain questlines far more when they related to my Origin story, as my character had a personal motivation to go after Howe, to help the Dalish, save the mages etc. There is none of that in DA:2. You know you came from Lothering, and thats pretty much it. Its almost like a bad version of an elder scrolls beginning. 

Modifié par DuskWarden, 23 octobre 2011 - 12:39 .

[nightscrawl]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I agree that there wasn't much of a reason to care about the Blight if you didn't already care about it, but I don't think many people really felt that way.

DAII however is much worse imo. Why should I do Petrice's quest when I say no? Because the plot demanded it? No, that doesn't fly with me.

I'll quote Petrice herself... "You must need coin. Everyone here does."

So even if you dislike Petrice or don't care about the saarebas you presumably need the coin for the expedition. The NPCs certainly don't know that a careful player can amass over 100g before going to the Deep Roads. Yes, I agree that the excuse of needing coin is perhaps a lame one to justify making you do this quest to continue on with the game, but as I mentioned above, story based games need to have some mandatory quests or there is no plot. Petrice and the Qunari are the climax of Act 2, so you have to have the background.

And if you don't think that some plot based quests should be mandatory, how would you solve the problem in a game franchise like Dragon Age of telling a story where it cannot be presumed that the player has done the quests where the plot is set up and important background information is given?


I will add though that I felt that some of the DA2 quests lacked the huge variety of results that DAO had. A great example is the quest chain involving Connor. There are several ways that quest can play out and they are all vastly different. The only constant is that the demons go away and Redcliffe is essentially saved, letting you move onto other things.

I don't get that same feeling with most of DA2's quests. The most galling example of this being Grace. No matter what you do she ends up in the circle and causes trouble in Act 3, even if you are 100% in support of mages and everything, she is still pissed at you. It's pretty annoying.

Modifié par nightscrawl, 23 octobre 2011 - 12:55 .

[Fallstar]

Morroian wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

For me, looking at all those quests makes me go "So... which one should I do first?", and imo that's a fatal design flaw of DAII, however much it references another game.

Problem with that is it implies games like Oblivion, Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas and presumably Skyrim are fatally flawed.

No. Games like that, the whole point is to create your own character however you want, and actually role play that character, do whatever quests you feel like doing and explore the world. In Dragon Age 2 we are limited to a single option for the protaganist, so you'd think, OK, lets have a strong backstory, to make sure that people aren't forced to play a boring character, which leads to developing some some form of motivation to complete quests and help people. This was absent, and is one of the reasons I disliked Hawke as a protagonist. We really should have played through the escape from Lothering, but the problem is more deep rooted than that. The player has very little motivation to complete any act 1 quests aside from loot to make money to go and make more money.

Especially when the premise for needing to make that money is very tenuous anyway. Gamlen did not have the right to sell the estate, you have documents to prove that, and no one actually owns the estate after you clear the slavers out, so surely posession of the estate would default to the lawful owner, Leandra. The first act in general is very poorly constructed.

[Fallstar]

nightscrawl wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I agree that there wasn't much of a reason to care about the Blight if you didn't already care about it, but I don't think many people really felt that way.

DAII however is much worse imo. Why should I do Petrice's quest when I say no? Because the plot demanded it? No, that doesn't fly with me.

I'll quote Petrice herself... "You must need coin. Everyone here does."

So even if you dislike Petrice or don't care about the saarebas you presumably need the coin for the expedition. The NPCs certainly don't know that a careful player can amass over 100g before going to the Deep Roads. Yes, I agree that the excuse of needing coin is perhaps a lame one to justify making you do this quest to continue on with the game, but as I mentioned above, story based games need to have some mandatory quests or there is no plot. Petrice and the Qunari are the climax of Act 2, so you have to have the background.

And if you don't think that some plot based quests should be mandatory, how would you solve the problem in a game franchise like Dragon Age of telling a story where it cannot be presumed that the player has done the quests where the plot is set up and important background information is given?

The problem is that Petrice is such a ****, most players I suspect would want to just walk away - but we can't. There are numerous occasions when I wanted to just kill her, not least when we are forced to watch her walk away after the Qunari are executed. Why couldn't Hawke have done a Genitive style murder knife at that point? The lack of choice is extremely disappointing. 

[TEWR]

Apollo Starflare wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Zanallen wrote...

In regards to Act I, I believe Bioware was paying homage to Baldur's Gate II. A large sequence of random quests with the express purpose of earning enough money to continue the story.

I'm sure that was something some people who played Baldur's Gate II liked, but I didn't. Probably because I never played BGII (or BG for that matter), but meh.

For me, looking at all those quests makes me go "So... which one should I do first?", and imo that's a fatal design flaw of DAII, however much it references another game.

I disagree. Whilst Act 1 was flawed in that it should have connected even more with the greater plot rather than just hinting at everything, I liked that it was a 'pick your route' Act. It didn't just hark back to BG, it reminded me of any BioWare game where you pick the order you complete the areas in. The ability to change up when you do which quest (to a point) has allowed future playthroughs to feel more unique, despite the recycling. It also manages to feel like a natural progression of events no matter how I change things up. If you ask me it just takes some imagination, creating your own series of events that lead to the Deep Roads. I even think up stuff that went on 'off camera' (deleted scenes if you will) that further help explain why things happen in the order they do.

For me that's good design. Or one example of it anyway.

But for certain questlines it makes no sense to do them in any order.

Example: When Hawke first lands at the Gallows he finds out about Meredith, who is the power in Kirkwall. Yet when he goes to do Act of Mercy, he seemingly forgets about who the hell Meredith is. 

This is made even worse if one does Enemies Among Us before Act of Mercy, because he asks Macha about Meredith and then ends up forgetting about her later on.

There has to be a certain semblance of order in a game like this imo.

[tmp7704]

nightscrawl wrote...

I'll quote Petrice herself... "You must need coin. Everyone here does."

So even if you dislike Petrice or don't care about the saarebas you presumably need the coin for the expedition. The NPCs certainly don't know that a careful player can amass over 100g before going to the Deep Roads.

And it'd only take something as simple as having an option to answer with "No, i don't." to let them know that in this particular case.

This situation is especially silly because it's not like Hawke is some unique snowflake that's necessary as the sacrifice to make this particular plot point come through, something Petrice even acknowledges herself afterwards -- there's supposedly thousands of refugees in Kirkwall who do need the coin, and any of them would work perfectly well as the victim.

[NedPepper]

I want to reply to the OP before getting into the argument:

You are absolutely right when it comes to Origins. I had trouble role playing my characters. I had to create characters who either have an interest in the Blight or were using the Blight to better their posiiton in the world.

In the sequel, I actually feel like my Hawkes have a little more leeway. They can be a little more nuanced. They can be selfish. They can be greedy. They can become mage rebels. They can be upright standing members in society. One thing to remember, your origin in DA 2 is either a powerful hedge mage taught by an accomplished mage, or a soldier. Naturally that is going to lead you toward being an adventuring type.

BUT, both games create a box that you have to play in. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? I think it's a neccasary aspect of creating a video game with a strong forward moving plot. DA 2 gives you more room to create, but you still have to move the plot along, and this is where the ineffectual argument comes in. Personally, I LIKE that Hawke is ineffectual. It was a nice change of pace from my superhuman Warden.

At the end of the day, Bioware has a formula, and it obviously works well enough, because I enjoy their games. Could they improve it? It's a slippery slope and could potentially cause the plot to lose any cohesiveness or even potency. It's a game, not a table top. I think all developers of RPGs have to consider this tricky issue.

[NedPepper]

Mr.House wrote...

Zanallen wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

The warden sense seems to have range of couple hundred meters, tops.

Yeah, there really is no upside to becoming a warden, is there? The only good thing I can think of is an immunity to the blight; one that only lasts until said warden succombs to the taint and dies.

Unless you get lucky like Laruis, then you become a mindless ghoul who the darkspawn can't sense :innocent:

Actually, every Warden who does not die in the Deep Roads on their calling end up like Larius.  What's interestng is that the Warden's ASSUME their calling comrades are dead.  But as Gaider showed us in The Calling, that may not be the case.  Wardens essentially become a kind of darkspawn.

With this in mind...I look at Origins and think my poor Warden was railroaded and lied to.  There is no happy ending for any of your Wardens unless Avernus can figure out how to reverse the effects of the Joining.