179 réponses à ce sujet

[Zjarcal]

bleetman wrote...

I was under the impression the right of annulment was your "kill all the mages" option.

Yeah... 

I guess people want the option to do it while riding griffons.

Modifié par Zjarcal, 04 novembre 2011 - 03:29 .

[bleetman]

Zjarcal wrote...

I guess people want the option to do it while riding griffons.

...Well, now that you mention it...

[The dead fish]

Xilizhra wrote...

And why are you posting this to begin with?

Your are joking, right ?

The logic is still present , this kind of behavior too. For a long time ( 8 month ) I see them, and this logic and this behavior remained. It's been a while since I want to tell you that, but I was waiting to see if there is a change in attitudes. And I waited for months. Lately, though, I feel that it does not totally disappear, with many examples, again these days. But my post doesn't target anyone in particular ( some ) , this is not the goal, I just want the message to be transmitted.

Have you been there lately ? Welcome on the BSN. :happy: ( joke, no offense )

----

Thanks everyone. I think the discussion between us would be much easier and less confrontational, with both writers sometimes and between us players, whatever the side we support. With this same common understanding of the importance of the story first, we would see more interest in trying to understand the perspective of the opponent, rather than the logic of " me I must win, based on a divine legitimacy, or right, " which will tend to push the arguments of the other without listening.
And do not think that I do not want big choices too. I also want to be able to do anything and everything.  But I mean, why refuse a specific script that might make its appearance in the future ? This also reduces the leeway of the author, who knows that some refuse a specific course.

Having its agenda, it is a wonderful thing, but this agenda is especially adapted to the situation that will evolve according to the story that the writers want to tell us. Because they need to write a story, great, interesting first. There won't be statut quo now anymore, and obviously not everyone will see what he hopes. However, Your agenda won't disappear, and you will still fight for what you want or what you love.

And among the pro-mage, I add , there are also many people I respect and have great views, with which it's fun to discuss.

But sometimes passion can ruin a discussion or to derive it. Especially in groups, and it is even more difficult later to talk each other.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 04 novembre 2011 - 07:01 .

[AlexXIV]

Btw. I love how this thread starts with 'There is something wrong with you.' I don't even know why, but always make me laugh when I re-enter the thread.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 04 novembre 2011 - 06:36 .

[The dead fish]

AlexXIV wrote...

Btw. I love how this thread starts with 'There is something wrong with you.' I don't even know why, but always make me laugh when I re-enter the thread.

Well,  maybe it looks a bit like publicity. With the man on the screen who looks at you with his finger pointed at you, ' there is something wrong with you. '

Modifié par Sylvianus, 04 novembre 2011 - 06:42 .

[tmp7704]

bleetman wrote...

I was under the impression the right of annulment was your "kill all the mages" option.

Yes, but see how well that worked out in DA2 ;/

The more you tighten your grip, the more mages slip through your fingers.

[labargegrrrl]

tmp7704 wrote...

bleetman wrote...

I was under the impression the right of annulment was your "kill all the mages" option.

Yes, but see how well that worked out in DA2 ;/

The more you tighten your grip, the more mages slip through your fingers.

Actually, the more I tighten my grip, the more Templars regret going up against a force-mage!    I freaking love that Fist of the Maker spell!  

Modifié par labargegrrrl, 04 novembre 2011 - 07:21 .

[Ryzaki]

tmp7704 wrote...

bleetman wrote...

I was under the impression the right of annulment was your "kill all the mages" option.

Yes, but see how well that worked out in DA2 ;/

The more you tighten your grip, the more mages slip through your fingers.

Exactly. 

Didn't even manage to kill all the buggers. 

[nightscrawl]

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

I think the OP has a good point, that I've been struggling to articulate for a while. There are a lot of people who seem to take it as some personal affront if Bioware fails to quite live up to whatever preconceived narrative is playing out in their head.

I shudder to imagine the complaints Bioware may get if the mage rebellion fails to change the status quo or worse if it succeeds and the mages aren't able to police themselves as well as the templars did. Not that this mentality is monopolized by the so called "pro-mage" people, but I have seen many similar examples regarding what Bioware will write for the future of the story regarding mages.

I'm not saying I don't have any preconceptions about what Dragon Age is myself or that even I agree with every decision the writers have made over the years because I certainly do and I really don't, but I don't think my opinion is being persecuted if Thedas doesn't line up exactly the way I'd hope or expect.

I never really got behind the explanation for the new Anders, but that doesn't mean I think Bioware has some anti-straight, pro voice changing agenda.

Lol "pro voice changing agenda."

Here's the thing... as a result of DA2 being so fundamentally about the conflict between the Chantry and mages, and of course with the way it ended, many people are just assuming that the next game will pick up from that point and involve more of those plot lines. This doesn't necessarily have to be the case though. Just as DA2 starts off in the same universe as our Warden from DAO, in a place where our Warden actually was, DA3 can use the events of DA2 as a jumping off point and go in a different direction from there.

Just as DA2 started with Lothering, DA3 could start off either during or after the mage/templar war, and depending on your 505/50 import, the antagonist of that fight can be reflected in the dialogue. The DA3 PC doesn't have to be involved at all, or can just be a bystander caught in the tide. Or perhaps we will be in a different location entirely, hearing that the mages are rising up and waiting for the waves of discontent to reach our current location. It could be any number of things, really.

[Augustei]

blothulfur wrote...

How horrible to slaughter all mages, far better to leash them under service to the Qun where they can learn of duty and responsibility.

The Qun is all.

They have been raised an living without an Arvaarad.. They would be like wild animals - they are corrupted. The Bas Saarebas must be destroyed we cannot allow them to taint the Qun it is to late for them.

[bleetman]

tmp7704 wrote...

bleetman wrote...

I was under the impression the right of annulment was your "kill all the mages" option.

Yes, but see how well that worked out in DA2 ;/

The more you tighten your grip, the more mages slip through your fingers.

Mmm, really? I distinctly remember being able to kill every last one that you encounter, siblings and the trio that surrender included.

[Bayz]

Zjarcal wrote...

bleetman wrote...

I was under the impression the right of annulment was your "kill all the mages" option.

Yeah... 

I guess people want the option to do it while riding griffons.

I was a pro mage fanatic to this point.

If you add that we can sing "Ride of the Valkiries" while doing it, sign me up in the first templar fanatic stuff. As in NAO.

[LobselVith8]

Xilizhra wrote...

And why are you posting this to begin with?

That's a good question. Why is the OP so upset that people want choices in the next game? I had my own issues with how I felt Hawke was railroaded in Dragon Age 2, and even in the DLC story expansions, so why would I want to buy another game where I'll be equally frustrated with how the protagonist has limited choices in the narrative? If I'm not going to find any enjoyment from the next Dragon Age game - from the story, the limited choices, the bad paraphrasing, or the reactive protagonist - then there's really no reason for me to invest my time or money in such a game. I'm not writing the next game off now, but if I find out those are going to be issues, then why should I (or anyone else) be villified for not wanting to buy the next game? No one at this community is under any obligation to purchase a game simply because it's labelled "Dragon Age."

I'm cautious about the next game. I'll wait to find out how the story is handled, whether the proactive is pro-active, if the story is good, if there are significant choices in the narrative, but if I don't hear that this is going to be avaliable, then I'm not going to purchase the game. It's as simple as that. If Bioware wants to take the franchise in a direction that I disagree with, where my protagonist is going to be railroaded down particular narrative paths that I don't obtain any enjoyment from, that's their choice as the creators, but I don't see a reason why I (or anyone else) should be villified for not wanting to purchase such a game.

[Huntress]

My agenda as a pro-mage is the right to shoot lightning at fools. :)P That includes crazoids blood-mages.

Oh and none of what the Op said "fit me" so I have no opinion other than not every mage is evil or a blood-mage. I like DA universe, I don't mind if the next game is about licking the divines boots, My characters shouldn't thought and I'll QQ in the forum about being forced to do so, no matter how many boot-licking polls are made.

[Bayz]

I will definatively support mages
I will definatively support the Seekers
I will definatively support Templars
I will definatively suppor the Qun
I will definatively support the Darkspawn
...

I will definatively try all the choices and then choose which one I like as my canon.
What I will nor is spell 'definitely' properly...wait damn!

[AlexXIV]

Choices are really a must have. Making RPGs is not writing virtual books. If you don't want your audience to have a say in the story, write a book. I don't care who wins but I want that my hero has the option to make his/her opinion about everything that happens clear. In words and actions. If my hero dies supporting the wrong side, then oh well, **** happens. But I don't want my hero to act in way that I consider either stupid or plain wrong.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 04 novembre 2011 - 02:19 .

[Noatz]

Choices, especially far reaching ones are necessary but difficult. Put too many in and the amopunt of work you make for yourself in the future becomes rather vast. I think this was the reason behind DA2 always ending one way - Champion leaving and mages and templars fighting. It means they can incorporate the events of DA2 into the next game much more easily, whereas with Origins they had to account for the Warden dying or surviving, Morrigan having her baby, Ferelden's monarch etc.

It's a toss up. Choice ultimately leads to a more satisying experience for the player though, so I do hope for a more open ended affair with DA3. And more locational variety.

Also its difficult to really predict what DA3 will be focused on. I doubt they will repeat the pattern of the new PC starting somewhere Hawke was, but I wouldn't be surprised to see them start in Ferelden again during the blight and flee; this time to Orlais. Origins originally referred to the various backgrounds of the Warden, but I think that more and more it has come to mean the event from which the major storylines of this universe originate from. So Hawke is driven away by the blight to Kirkwall where he/she starts the mage-templar war, it could be that the DA3 protagonist moves away from the blight to Orlais or somewhere else where they set another big chain of events in motion.

[tmp7704]

bleetman wrote...

Mmm, really? I distinctly remember being able to kill every last one that you encounter, siblings and the trio that surrender included.

The problem is how many you don't encounter because Orsino tells them to flee and bring news to the other circles. And, armed in the plot armour, off they go, apparently in numbers large enough to spark continent-wide uprising...

[Zanallen]

bleetman wrote...

I was under the impression the right of annulment was your "kill all the mages" option.

When I say all mages, I mean all mages.

[Addai]

It's true, you get the impression around here some days that people think they actually are mages. I take it that it's because some people have equated "mage freedom" with modern civil rights causes, and because the development was so extreme that no realistic/ nuanced case was made for why mages are dangerous and civil society has a right to control them. Rather than the bag of mixed nuts that is Kirkwall, I would rather have started out at the College of Magi in Cumberland and seen *mages* making a rational case to control mages. Fenris could not carry this, since he has credibility problems.

[The dead fish]

@Lobsel Please, stop that crap about choices, that's not the matter, and you know it. ( however you didn't read it seems ) I am one of those who complained the most about choices, just after the release of dragon age 2. One of the first ones to talk about illusion of choice, so please, no, just no.

I don't even bother to answer to you. Because If you didn't understand the first post, I can't do anything.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 04 novembre 2011 - 04:12 .

[The dead fish]

Addai67 wrote...

It's true, you get the impression around here some days that people think they actually are mages. I take it that it's because some people have equated "mage freedom" with modern civil rights causes, and because the development was so extreme that no realistic/ nuanced case was made for why mages are dangerous and civil society has a right to control them. Rather than the bag of mixed nuts that is Kirkwall, I would rather have started out at the College of Magi in Cumberland and seen *mages* making a rational case to control mages. Fenris could not carry this, since he has credibility problems.

I agree. Maybe the script didn't help either, indeed.

[labargegrrrl]

lets remember that the last time bioware gave us a huge, lore-altering choice, we ended up with a gazillion threads about the OGB! i support framed narrative!

[Bayz]

AlexXIV wrote...

Choices are really a must have. Making RPGs is not writing virtual books. If you don't want your audience to have a say in the story, write a book. I don't care who wins but I want that my hero has the option to make his/her opinion about everything that happens clear. In words and actions. If my hero dies supporting the wrong side, then oh well, **** happens. But I don't want my hero to act in way that I consider either stupid or plain wrong.

It depends if it is a Western RPG or an JRPG. JRPG are D-E-F-I-N-E-T-L-Y (think got it right this time) about the history more than choices. I play Western RPG'c mainly for the immersion and the choices and I play JRPG's for the female arm...uhh...thrilling histories, yes that will do.