384 réponses à ce sujet

[Aaleel]

DreGregoire wrote...

Aaleel wrote...

You earned a name throughout the underworld  HOW? 

Instead of filling the first act with quests accomplished nothing more than raising money.  Let me do quests for the smugglers or mercenaries.  Let more people recognize me around parts of the city, let me get different reactions when I walked in the hanged man.  Let me make my name.

I too would have felt more a part of my character if I had been allowed to live that year, or portions of it. I would love a dlc about that first year! *sighs* I'll have to settle for the tale my imagination conjures.

And this is ultimately my biggest issue.  The game takes place over ten years.  I'm not opposed to using my own imagination at times.  But having to pretty much write fan-fiction for 3/4 of the ten years or more pretty much screams something is wrong here.

They needed to either shorten the timeline, or break it up more so the player could play through more periods of time.

[TheRealJayDee]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

I didn't say anything about the believability of DA2. It's entirely possible to come up with lore-justified reasons that break both games' railroading. Objectively, they are both pretty clearly but-thou-must scenarios. Some folks are fine with Hawke staying in Kirkwall in DA2, because they felt their Hawkes had reason to do so. Some folks are unhappy with the Warden being forced to stay in Ferelden to combat the Blight there, rather than do the (arguably) smarter thing of getting more help. These are both completely legitimate stances to take. You may have less problem with DAO's railroading than DA2's, but you have to recognize that it's simply a personal preference to do so. 

Edit:

Though for Orlais. The Warden really wouldn't come with a army at his back. I have severe doubts (especially given what Riordan says) that the Orlesians wouldn't do anything other than tell the Warden "well Fereldan is lost and we already knew the blight was coming. You come here and do X while the elder wardens do the important things."

Then we have a fade to black, and return with an army at our back. Or we go out to gather more forces, from Tevinter, or parts of Orlais, or Nevarra, or the Free Marches. The Warden may not be *leading* the army (not like the Warden really led the army at the Battle of Denerim anyway), but there would still *be* an army, and there would still be stuff happening.

PS. Getting to Orlais from Ferelden just requires your feet. The Imperial Highway runs all the way to Orlais. 

But that's just what the Warden is trying to do - get more help. Only that by using the treaties he has the off chance that he might actually do something against the Blight before Ferelden is destroyed by it. The forces from Orlais and beyond won't be any quicker to act if the Warden tries to flee the country and warn them. They will notice that there's a Blight going on on their own, and they won't need two rookie Wardens to help or even lead them. But I think I had this exact same discussion before, and I won't convince you anyway.

I still think that trying to save your country and probably everyone you know from being eaten by the 'spawn is a clearer motivation than... whatever Hawke had to do in Kirkwall.

[maxernst]

AlexXIV wrote...

All true but what I don't understand is the reason behind not making a 'special' character like Warden, Sprit Monk, Jedi Knight, etc. and then, instead of giving him more freedom you get the same railroad as if he was born with a special heritage which forces things on him.

So much this.  It was the biggest basic design issue that I have with the game.  If you're not going to have a single overarching objective (like defeating a blight), you should have a more freeform game, one in which Hawke's with different motivations would choose different paths.

[jlb524]

AlexXIV wrote...
All true but what I don't understand is the reason behind not making a 'special' character like Warden, Sprit Monk, Jedi Knight, etc. and then, instead of giving him more freedom you get the same railroad as if he was born with a special heritage which forces things on him. I mean that's basically what happens in DA2. You feel forced on a path even though you are supposed to be free from obligations other than your family. If they at least tied the family in more I could understand that Hawke stays in Kirkwall because of family matters. But the family is sort of neglectable after act 1. The only family matter mentionworthy after act1 is Leandra's death which I needed as much as the pox.

How much more freedom can they give and still make a game that's typical of BioWare?  If they won't change, should the PC always be a 'special' character?

I agree that placing the PC in a special club that has to do X makes it seem okay to be forced down a more linear path.  I personally enjoyed taking a break from this 'special' type of character, though, and didn't mind any railroading, as I don't see it as feeling any different from what I had to deal with in other games from BW.

[hoorayforicecream]

TheRealJayDee wrote...

But that's just what the Warden is trying to do - get more help. Only that by using the treaties he has the off chance that he might actually do something against the Blight before Ferelden is destroyed by it. The forces from Orlais and beyond won't be any quicker to act if the Warden tries to flee the country and warn them. They will notice that there's a Blight going on on their own, and they won't need two rookie Wardens to help or even lead them. But I think I had this exact same discussion before, and I won't convince you anyway.

Historically, no Blight before the events of DAO has been defeated in under a decade or without the combined forces of Tevinter and Orlais. Uniting the forces of one nation to fight the Blight has been tried and failed. Repeatedly. It's not whether the forces in Orlais could respond faster, it's whether they would even be enough to stop the Blight at all. As I stated before, it would not be the first time in Thedas history that a country had to be sacrificed in order to gather sufficient forces to stop the Blight. Both Nevarra and Antiva had been sacrificed during the third and fourth Blights. One could argue that, from a historical standpoint, the Warden's actions were counterproductive because it would only have wasted Ferelden's military resources rather than try to conserve them until they had a better chance of winning.

[Aaleel]

Rojahar wrote...

TheRealJayDee wrote...

I still think that trying to save your country and probably everyone you know from being eaten by the 'spawn is a clearer motivation than... whatever Hawke had to do in Kirkwall.

Your friends, family, and the life you've built is in Kirkwall. Why does my Dwarf care about Ferelden? Why does my Elf, who's clan isn't even in Ferelden anymore? Kirkwall became Hawke's home just as much as Ferelden was the Warden's. Like Hooray said, it's simply a matter of preference. I saw no reason at all for Hawke to return to Ferelden.

I can't see it.  Unless you use a mod, there's only two options.  You're a mage or your sister is a mage.  I see no reason why a mage would stay in a city that:

1) Has the largest contigent of Templars anywhere other than Orlais and...
2) If you or your sister are discovered you'll be placed in a circle where by far the most abuse and mistreatment take place.

I'm not saying you have to go back to Lothering, but I can't see why any mage would not want to get the hell out of Kirkwall. 

[Aaleel]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

TheRealJayDee wrote...

But that's just what the Warden is trying to do - get more help. Only that by using the treaties he has the off chance that he might actually do something against the Blight before Ferelden is destroyed by it. The forces from Orlais and beyond won't be any quicker to act if the Warden tries to flee the country and warn them. They will notice that there's a Blight going on on their own, and they won't need two rookie Wardens to help or even lead them. But I think I had this exact same discussion before, and I won't convince you anyway.

Historically, no Blight before the events of DAO has been defeated in under a decade or without the combined forces of Tevinter and Orlais. Uniting the forces of one nation to fight the Blight has been tried and failed. Repeatedly. It's not whether the forces in Orlais could respond faster, it's whether they would even be enough to stop the Blight at all. As I stated before, it would not be the first time in Thedas history that a country had to be sacrificed in order to gather sufficient forces to stop the Blight. Both Nevarra and Antiva had been sacrificed during the third and fourth Blights. One could argue that, from a historical standpoint, the Warden's actions were counterproductive because it would only have wasted Ferelden's military resources rather than try to conserve them until they had a better chance of winning.

Can't agree with this.  The Blight was not going to stop gaining strength.  All the forces in Ferelden either didn't know or didn't believe a Blight was going on in the first place. If you don't do anything they get picked off one by one, depleted and wiped out.  Help wasn't going to come in time to stop that.

Uniting the races and trying to stop the Blight before it could get full strength was pretty much the only card you had to play.  Redcliffe, Denerim, and the other cities would have all been attacked eventually anyway, and divided they would have been easily overrun.

[AlexXIV]

jlb524 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
All true but what I don't understand is the reason behind not making a 'special' character like Warden, Sprit Monk, Jedi Knight, etc. and then, instead of giving him more freedom you get the same railroad as if he was born with a special heritage which forces things on him. I mean that's basically what happens in DA2. You feel forced on a path even though you are supposed to be free from obligations other than your family. If they at least tied the family in more I could understand that Hawke stays in Kirkwall because of family matters. But the family is sort of neglectable after act 1. The only family matter mentionworthy after act1 is Leandra's death which I needed as much as the pox.

How much more freedom can they give and still make a game that's typical of BioWare?  If they won't change, should the PC always be a 'special' character?

I agree that placing the PC in a special club that has to do X makes it seem okay to be forced down a more linear path.  I personally enjoyed taking a break from this 'special' type of character, though, and didn't mind any railroading, as I don't see it as feeling any different from what I had to deal with in other games from BW.

Doesn't need to be a club, just a base motivation that leads from start to end. In case of DA2 I would think that family Hawke/Amell theme basically jumps at you. But after Act1 the family is kinda pushed back. Basically because one sibling is taken away and the rest of the family is more or less talking furniture. Not really interactive.

[tmp7704]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

As for Loghain's assassins... Loghain believes that all of the wardens died at Ostagar, until the Warden actually starts making his/her presence known in Ferelden.

There's rewards offered for Wardens' heads by Loghain (and people are acting up on opportunity to collect these) as soon as in Lothering.

He'd have to either join with the allied forces to fight the Blight, or get ground up into dogmeat between the opposing forces.

I think it's fairly obvious Loghain would rather die fighting than submit to what he'd perceive to be "invading Orlaisians".

The unfortunate part here is, it'd mean the allied forces trying to fight the blight would be missing assistance of forces otherwise collected by the player, and would suffer additional losses from fighting Loghain. It's not guaranteed it'd be Loghain to end up as the meat part of the sandwich -- he's not an idiot tactics-wise, and could time his assaults onto the allied forces while they're occupied fighting the darkspawn. Effectively turning the allied forces into the meat, instead (and allowing the Blight to get the upper hand as the result)

It's why Eamon is so hell-bent of removing Loghain from the picture in the first place.

[Gunderic]

jlb524 wrote...
Theoretically, there's more than one possible way to stop the Blight.  In game?  Of course!  You only have one option that you must follow.

But you get the 'option' to stop the Blight. Theoretically, it's made clear from the start of the game that doing X, and Y, whatever the game throws at you, is the 'most efficient' way of stopping the Blight. Like solving a dungeon puzzle or taking down a wizard's mana shield or what-have-you, provided you want to do it, you're only given a limited number of options, always. It's not about how you want to use your free will to interact with something but how the interaction works. In Origins, requesting alliances (again, if you want to stop the Blight) doesn't force the character to be tied under a very limited number of mindsets, and doesn't particularly challenge your character's philosophy/alignment per say (although being forced into helping Ferelden does), unless you're playing a very chaotic character type. If stopping the Blight would necessarily involve doing something evil, I wouldn't like to not have the option to do something else (even if it would result in 'failure'). And it's something that makes sense in Origins' case, as most of my characters wouldn't question the upsides of uniting a country under conflict. So it doesn't create the... dissonance that Dragon Age 2's plot can. I'm not saying Origins doesn't force your character to be of any mindset; it does (agreeing to stop the Blight in Ferelden), I'm saying Dragon Age 2 does it a lot worse, while at the same time, trying harder to challenge your character's views.

Well, give me the details...why is DA2 worse than any other BW game?  It seems to be similar in 'railroading' to any other BW game I've played.  Is it just b/c you thought what the character had to do in DA:O, ME1/ME2, BG2, etc. was interesting and what Hawke had to do was not?

No, it's because 'my Hawke' is forced into holding conflicting beliefs with what I would like to roleplay as far more often. I think I've already said that. And I'm given very little possibility to act on my choices. I don't want to support the mages, or the templars. It's made out to be a controversial decision either way and in the end I'm not given adequate options. The same can be said about the Qunari, Anders, Merrill, mercenaries vs. thieves, etc. Not wanting to stop the Blight, if I compare it as an equivalent to not wanting to stop the mages vs. templars conflict, is not the same as wanting to be neutral (or uninvolved in a full-scale faction war) in the latter's case imo. I can assume in both instances that my characters play along and want to have both conflicts resolved.

Yes, you're getting 'railroaded' if for some reason you want to leave Ferelden (and there are potential reasons, given the darkspawn invasion). And yes, you're getting railroaded for a lot more many reasons in Dragon Age 2 if you want to do something you can't. Dragon Age: Origins at least had a more conventional BioWare plot structure that actually worked, because it's something they've done in the past, in addition to being a campaign setting in which it's pretty easy to integrate a wide variety of character builds thanks to the chaotic evil enemy.

Modifié par Gunderic, 03 novembre 2011 - 09:31 .

[Gunderic]

Rojahar wrote...

TheRealJayDee wrote...

I still think that trying to save your country and probably everyone you know from being eaten by the 'spawn is a clearer motivation than... whatever Hawke had to do in Kirkwall.

Your friends, family, and the life you've built is in Kirkwall. 

It's too bad that motivation is slowly deconstructed and fades out in hindsight as the plot progresses.

And imo the problem isn't going to Kirkwall in the first place from a RP perspective, but the fact that Kirkwall sucks. If we go by the line of 'I don't wanna get involved with the main quest' route then most game plots could be accused of railroading you to some extent. I accepted that my Grey Warden (even if I would have preferred the option of not being one) had to fight darkspawn, just as I accepted the premise of Dragon Age 2 that I had to go to Kirkwall, and then I had to even get somewhat involved in the Mage vs. Templars conflict. What I didn't like was being forced into choosing one over the other (among many other things).

Modifié par Gunderic, 03 novembre 2011 - 01:05 .

[Gunderic]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

All of those things that he/she'll already have if he/she went to the deeproads. And even better he/she isn't alone. 

It's not a complete unknown to the dwarves given the fact that you're given maps. You're following someone else's trail. That said yes it's a risk and there's plenty of nasties in the deep roads. There's plenty of nasties on the surface to. And what resources will the Warden have other than what he/she can carry on his/her back on the surfaceanyway? Unless he/she stays close to populatedareas (which will gve more of loghain's assassins ample time to strike) he/she will be pretty close to the conditions on the deep roads. Just with less spiders and darkspawn and darkness and company. 

Traveling to Orlais is a lot safer than traveling the Deep Roads. If it wasn't, then the successful Deep Roads expeditions wouldn't be so profitable - lots more people travel between nations than travel the Deep Roads. As for what resources... the Warden goes to Orlais, then comes back with an army and more Wardens at his/her back. The treaties weren't solely for Ferelden to band together to fight the Blight; the Blights are a continental-scale threat that all of Thedas agrees to band together to fight. The previous Blights required the combined might of Orlais and Tevinter to defeat.

Didn't Alistair say that Orlais probably got word of the darkspawn threat (and the defeat at Ostagar), and how Loghain might try to take steps to prevent the Orlesians from coming to Ferelden, and how going there would take too long and 'we must assume they won't be arriving in time'? I remember it somewhat like that, but I haven't played Origins in a while.

Modifié par Gunderic, 03 novembre 2011 - 01:06 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

TheRealJayDee wrote...

But that's just what the Warden is trying to do - get more help. Only that by using the treaties he has the off chance that he might actually do something against the Blight before Ferelden is destroyed by it. The forces from Orlais and beyond won't be any quicker to act if the Warden tries to flee the country and warn them. They will notice that there's a Blight going on on their own, and they won't need two rookie Wardens to help or even lead them. But I think I had this exact same discussion before, and I won't convince you anyway.

Historically, no Blight before the events of DAO has been defeated in under a decade or without the combined forces of Tevinter and Orlais. Uniting the forces of one nation to fight the Blight has been tried and failed. Repeatedly. It's not whether the forces in Orlais could respond faster, it's whether they would even be enough to stop the Blight at all. As I stated before, it would not be the first time in Thedas history that a country had to be sacrificed in order to gather sufficient forces to stop the Blight. Both Nevarra and Antiva had been sacrificed during the third and fourth Blights. One could argue that, from a historical standpoint, the Warden's actions were counterproductive because it would only have wasted Ferelden's military resources rather than try to conserve them until they had a better chance of winning.

And yet they defeated the Fifth Blight by doing what they did. 

Huh.

[Zanallen]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

And yet they defeated the Fifth Blight by doing what they did. 

Huh.

Pure PC power nonsense. Just as unbelievable as a group of teenagers defeating the ancient evil threatening to devour the souls of the living or a boy and his dog taking on hordes of trained warriors to save the day from a corrupt dictator. With most video games, DAO included, the PC can accomplish anything and everything to achieve the ultimate good ending no matter the odds or no matter how many more skilled and better trained people failed before him. Plot armor and PC power nonsense.

That is what I find so refreshing about Hawke. There is no real good ending for him. No matter what you do, he'll fail somehow. He's far more human than the invincible super warden from DAO.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Zanallen wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

And yet they defeated the Fifth Blight by doing what they did. 

Huh.

Pure PC power nonsense. Just as unbelievable as a group of teenagers defeating the ancient evil threatening to devour the souls of the living or a boy and his dog taking on hordes of trained warriors to save the day from a corrupt dictator. With most video games, DAO included, the PC can accomplish anything and everything to achieve the ultimate good ending no matter the odds or no matter how many more skilled and better trained people failed before him. Plot armor and PC power nonsense.

That is what I find so refreshing about Hawke. There is no real good ending for him. No matter what you do, he'll fail somehow. He's far more human than the invincible super warden from DAO.

LoL.  Whatever.

[Zanallen]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

LoL.  Whatever.

So you are telling me that the warden defeating a blight in 1/10 the time it usually takes with only the previously devastated armies of Ferelden at his back is purely because of his skill and strategic genius? That's ridiculous. He's a Chosen One, same as in any JRPG. The young man who defied the odds to do what no one has ever done before in the history of forever. There is absolutely no reason in-game to think that your plucky band of heroes would accomplish jack squat that they set out to do.

Modifié par Zanallen, 03 novembre 2011 - 04:10 .

[rabbitor]

On one hand people want this dark, gritty, mature gaming experience, on the other they want the superhero story where they save the day and get the girl.

[Aaleel]

Zanallen wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

And yet they defeated the Fifth Blight by doing what they did. 

Huh.

Pure PC power nonsense. Just as unbelievable as a group of teenagers defeating the ancient evil threatening to devour the souls of the living or a boy and his dog taking on hordes of trained warriors to save the day from a corrupt dictator. With most video games, DAO included, the PC can accomplish anything and everything to achieve the ultimate good ending no matter the odds or no matter how many more skilled and better trained people failed before him. Plot armor and PC power nonsense.

That is what I find so refreshing about Hawke. There is no real good ending for him. No matter what you do, he'll fail somehow. He's far more human than the invincible super warden from DAO.

- So the commoner Hawke who just happens to catch the eye of Flemith.
- Just happens to be the one makes this huge name for him/herself throughout the Kirkwall underworld
- Just happens to catch the eye of Varric and be hand chosen to come on the most sought after expedition in the city.
- Takes a handful of people and defeat dragons, and makes their way alone through parts of the deed roads never before seen.  Finally defeating the ancient rock wraith and taking enough loot to be a millionaire.
- Then even though Hawke has no knowledge of the Qunari or their culture, is pretty much handpicked to be the liason/ambassodor to the Arishok.
- City guard taken over, but Hawke fight his/her way to the Arishok and defeats him in one on one combat, and become the hero of the city.
- and so on and so on....

You can do this with any game.  But don't act like one is any more believable than the other.  If anyone was the chosen one from the start it was Hawke.

[TheElderWand]

Zanallen wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

LoL.  Whatever.

So you are telling me that the warden defeating a blight in 1/10 the time it usually takes with only the previously devastated armies of Ferelden at his back is purely because of his skill and strategic genius? That's ridiculous. He's a Chosen One, same as in any JRPG. The young man who defied the odds to do what no one has ever done before in the history of forever. There is absolutely no reason in-game to think that your plucky band of heroes would accomplish jack squat that they set out to do.

We play games to get away from the reality of life! It's a fantasy game, why does it have to be realistic?

I don't think there's any satisfaction with the PC failing all the time, whilst in Origins, i felt VERY satisfied by the end of it! Dragon Age 2 doesn't take its combat seriously(have you seen how high they bloody jump?) yet it's suddenly "good" game making for our hero to fail all the time? what's the fun in that? especially in Dragon Age 2 which takes itself less seriously than Origins! 

The only thing that is ridiculous here is that you're defending DA2 by saying it is more realistic in the story, even though it's a fantasy and not real life, and that Origins failed in this aspect.

[tmp7704]

Zanallen wrote...

So you are telling me that the warden defeating a blight in 1/10 the time it usually takes with only the previously devastated armies of Ferelden at his back is purely because of his skill and strategic genius?

It's pretty much down to being able to land the killing blow on the archdemon (and that in turn is down to Riordan managing to cripple its flight ability, preventing it from escaping)

When you think of it, it makes less sense why the previous Blights after the first one lasted so long and took that many to stop them, when the weak point and the obvious strategy to defeat it was known. Perhaps the previous archdemons were smarter and preferred to lead from a safe distance?

Modifié par tmp7704, 03 novembre 2011 - 05:03 .

[FaeQueenCory]

tmp7704 wrote...

Zanallen wrote...

So you are telling me that the warden defeating a blight in 1/10 the time it usually takes with only the previously devastated armies of Ferelden at his back is purely because of his skill and strategic genius?

It's pretty much down to being able to land the killing blow on the archdemon (and that in turn is down to Riordan managing to cripple its flight ability, preventing it from escaping)

When you think of it, it makes less sense why the previous Blights after the first one lasted so long and took that many to stop them, when the weak point and the obvious strategy to defeat it was known. Perhaps the previous archdemons were smarter and preferred to lead from a safe distance?

OH OH OH! I know that one! I know that one!

The reason why Dumat's blight lasted for 200ish years is because there was no such things as the Grey Wardens at that time!
So they probably did indeed kill poor old Dumat many times... but He just body hopped.... so he got better each time he "died".

Aaaand... if you look at the length of the blights.... they are dramatically decreasing in length:
Dumat: ~200yrs
Zazikel: ~90yrs
Toth: only 15yrs
Andoral: ~10yrs
Urthemiel: ~2yrs

Basically this shows that the Wardens are getting better at what they do, by being able to cut down on the time Archdemons are running amok.... and also, they might have gotten the locations of all the Old Gods after Zazikel... that would explain why they could be so quick to mobilize and defeat the Archdemons in such a shorter amount of time. (~90>>>~10)

The reason for Urthemiel being taken out so quickly is two-fold:
1) Grey Wardens know what they are doing by now. The talent of the Wardens grows with each Blight, hence why the times decrease so dramatically.
2) Urthemiel is the "god of beauty, in ancient times Urthemiel was worshipped by musicians, artists, and poets." You don't get to be all big and powerful... when you are a god of beauty.... music.... art... poetry.... It's a VERY safe assumption that Urthemiel is the prettiest of all the Old Gods.... but he is sure as hell isn't ANYWHERE near as powerful as any of the others...

So, when you actually read the codex about Urthemiel... it really makes the whole "I just killed the Archdemon!" pride... really hollow.... because you actually just killed the weakest one.
(Also the fact that the Architect handpicked Him over the other two.... just is one more nail in the coffin of how weak Urthemiel is...)

So really... the Warden really had it easy when he fought Urthemiel. That's why s/he was able to do it so quickly with such a small force.

Modifié par FaeQueenCory, 03 novembre 2011 - 05:31 .

[Zanallen]

Aaleel wrote...

- So the commoner Hawke who just happens to catch the eye of Flemith.
- Just happens to be the one makes this huge name for him/herself throughout the Kirkwall underworld
- Just happens to catch the eye of Varric and be hand chosen to come on the most sought after expedition in the city.
- Takes a handful of people and defeat dragons, and makes their way alone through parts of the deed roads never before seen.  Finally defeating the ancient rock wraith and taking enough loot to be a millionaire.
- Then even though Hawke has no knowledge of the Qunari or their culture, is pretty much handpicked to be the liason/ambassodor to the Arishok.
- City guard taken over, but Hawke fight his/her way to the Arishok and defeats him in one on one combat, and become the hero of the city.
- and so on and so on....

You can do this with any game.  But don't act like one is any more believable than the other.  If anyone was the chosen one from the start it was Hawke.

I never said one was more believable than the other. I said I find Hawke refreshing because he is unable to achieve everything he sets out to do. There is absolutely no way for him to really "win". It is an interesting take on the "hero" character and I enjoyed it. YMMV, of course.

[Zanallen]

TheElderWand wrote...

We play games to get away from the reality of life! It's a fantasy game, why does it have to be realistic?

I don't think there's any satisfaction with the PC failing all the time, whilst in Origins, i felt VERY satisfied by the end of it! Dragon Age 2 doesn't take its combat seriously(have you seen how high they bloody jump?) yet it's suddenly "good" game making for our hero to fail all the time? what's the fun in that? especially in Dragon Age 2 which takes itself less seriously than Origins! 

The only thing that is ridiculous here is that you're defending DA2 by saying it is more realistic in the story, even though it's a fantasy and not real life, and that Origins failed in this aspect.

I'm not defending DA2 nor saying its more realistic. All I said was that I find Hawke to be a refreshing change of pace. I play video games to experience an enjoyable story. What I find enjoyable is entirely subjective. You might not like it and that's fine. I don't actually care what you like. Stories don't have to be happy to be enjoyable. The PCs in the vast majority of the games out there are super heroes capable of accomplishing everything and achieving the ultimate good ending where everyone who can be saved is saved. I thought it was nice to have a PC who ultimately fails.

Also, what does the combat have to do with this discussion? Was DA2's combat more over the top than DAO's? Sure. No one can deny that. It was very stylized. Not that the combat in Origins was any less ridiculous. It was just ridiculous in different ways.

[Aaleel]

Zanallen wrote...

Aaleel wrote...

- So the commoner Hawke who just happens to catch the eye of Flemith.
- Just happens to be the one makes this huge name for him/herself throughout the Kirkwall underworld
- Just happens to catch the eye of Varric and be hand chosen to come on the most sought after expedition in the city.
- Takes a handful of people and defeat dragons, and makes their way alone through parts of the deed roads never before seen.  Finally defeating the ancient rock wraith and taking enough loot to be a millionaire.
- Then even though Hawke has no knowledge of the Qunari or their culture, is pretty much handpicked to be the liason/ambassodor to the Arishok.
- City guard taken over, but Hawke fight his/her way to the Arishok and defeats him in one on one combat, and become the hero of the city.
- and so on and so on....

You can do this with any game.  But don't act like one is any more believable than the other.  If anyone was the chosen one from the start it was Hawke.

I never said one was more believable than the other. I said I find Hawke refreshing because he is unable to achieve everything he sets out to do. There is absolutely no way for him to really "win". It is an interesting take on the "hero" character and I enjoyed it. YMMV, of course.

But like accomplishments that have plot armor.  The failures had plot armor.  They were going to happen regardless.

It's not like someone came and asked for your help catching a serial killer and you blew them off or said that you didn't have time, and then your mother got taken.  That's a failing because you didn't act in time.

It's not like you took left your sibling behind and something happened because you didn't bring them with you.  Or vice versa you didn't leave them at home so they got blighted.  That's a failing based on a decision you made.

But to just have stuff happen regardless in an effort to add artficial darkness or sadness to the game is no better IMHO.