135 réponses à ce sujet

[TEWR]

hoorayforicecream wrote...



Feynriel would beg to differ. Why would the demons try to beguile him if they could just forcibly take him over?

Feynriel was a Somniari -- A.K.A a Dreamer who are very rare and powerful mages -- whose mind was on the verge of collapsing.

Marethari herself said that most Somniari prove too frail of mind to survive a demon's possession.

IIRC, Torpor said that his mind was of no value if it was unstable. I think the demons would also be smart enough to know that.

Idunna's mind control is resistable by a non-mage Hawke... I don't think it's a strong example of Merrill's magical mastery. She also isn't able to identify that Keran isn't possessed. She doesn't *think* he's possessed. Her exact words are "I don't know... It's... It's clean. There is no scent of demons in his blood." Is this a guarantee? You can choose to read it as such, but I am still skeptical.

I guess 6 years with no demon attack caused by Keran and the fact that Anders also guarantees he's demon free since he says that if he were an Abomination he would've fought back aren't guarantees either.

Or the fact that the player can kill Keran in Best Served Cold and he doesn't defend himself like an Abomination would

Bethany and Anders have similar lines, and none of them guarantees it. Anders uses the reasoning "If a demon was in there, it would have defended itself. Looks like he's clear", which assumes that demons aren't capable of hiding and biding their time.

what's Bethany's line?

]

Merrill, Anders and Bethany could try to sense if a demon possessed someone. That doesn't mean that they know what type of demon,

They very clearly state that the Rock Wraith Abomination is a Hunger Abomination, and he admits that he won't see his feast end when the Rock Wraiths feed on the lyrium. 

And if Templars can really sense it, why wouldn't they just sense the demons possessing their recruits themselves?

I said disturbances in the Veil -- like the very air of the Alienage that Ser Otto and a Templar Warden can sense
 -- not possession.

Possession shouldn't be conflated into being the same as a disturbance in the Veil.

Really, it comes down to whether you believe that demons are capable of higher thinking and reasoning beyond the immediate. If you don't think they are capable of that, then what you say makes sense. However, if you do, then it calls everything you use as evidence into question, because it means the demons could be disseminating. And, since Torpor (and other demons) offer guile and tricks to make deals with mortals, I'd have to say that you've not any real hard evidence to your claim.

I have no doubt demons can be clever if they're at the very least a Hunger demon (since Rage demons are definitely mindless).

Torpor's attempt to recruit Hawke and Audacity's manipulation of Marethari is evidence enough of that

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 01 décembre 2011 - 03:48 .

[AtreiyaN7]

bluebullets wrote...

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Because triggering a mage rebellion across Thedas has nothing to do with Thedas AT ALL!!!!!! Yeah, they totally weren't hinting at a growing templar vs. mage conflict in DA:O or Awakening. *rolleyes* DA2 has little to do with Grey Wardens, but to claim that the game has nothing to do with the DA universe is flat-out stupid.

It was quite obvious I meant other than the fact that the mage blew up the house of ****ing god, and started a ****ing riot, which lead to a war.
This was 30 minutes of the game, and was completely rushed, and nothing leading up to it had much to do with the conflict, when you look at the entirety of the game.

And asside from this, even this had nothing to do with anything else that was built on. It could have easily been a new franchise entirely.

You know what's quite obvious? The fact that you're beating the "if a DA game doesn't involve my Warden, it sucks and/or has nothing to do with the DA universe (in my mind)" horse to death, like I've seen umpteen times here before.

Sure, nothing during the entire course of DA2 implied that anything major was going to happen - not Meredith's increasingly outrageous treatement of mages as time passed, not the quests involving Feynriel, not the kidnapped templars, not Grace, not Anders' behavior, etc. Yep, nothing in any other part of DA2 had anything to do with the mage/templar conflict. It was such a small, tiny, infinitesmal part of the game. *rolleyes more*

EDIT: Admittedly, it could very well be that you're not actually beating the Grey Warden horse to death, but it seems like it by virtue of your mentioning DA:O. Let's face it, whenever someone brings it up, nine times out of time it seems to involve them being upset that the story wasn't about their Warden.

Modifié par AtreiyaN7, 01 décembre 2011 - 04:49 .

[SkittlesKat96]

Of course its in the DA world...

Can't you handle the DA team making games that don't involve Blights, Flemeth, Ferelden and the Grey Wardens?

Does the original art style of Kirkwall make it seem like a different game? Did you want Kirkwall to look like Denerim or something? O.o

I agree with some of your complaints just a little bit though. DA 2 for a Bioware game could have been done way more solidly. It was almost on the edge of being mediocre...

[Plaintiff]

bluebullets wrote...
I did not say anything about it being about one character.
It is about one world, and da2 does not do anything in relation to that world, or expand on anything that we know about the world.

Ecept the mage/templar conflict, and the situation with the Qunari,  and the situation with Orlais and what's going on in post-Blight Ferelden, what Alistair, Zevran, Leliana and Nathaniel are all up to. These things and more all get a mention. No, DA2 is not a direct continuation of the previous story. It was never supposed to be, but we still learn how things are going.

How do we know flemeth is planning something? Morrigan told the warden in the dlc.

But what makes you think it's super-duper important? Flemeth appears on screen for a grand total of thirty minutes combined, in both games.

almost every tragety in the game could have been prevented very easily. "Mother. I heard about a murderer sending out white lilies" - was that so hard? Lopping heads off blood mages seems pretty obvious, etc.

That's not even slightly realistic. Do you call up your mother and tell her to watch out every time you hear about a serial killer? No, because that would be silly. Blood mages are not immediatly apparent, and there are some players, like myself, who don't believe that blood magic or blood mages are inherently evil.

DA2 was pathetic in relation to da1. Bioware should be ashamed. They couldn't even succeed in making me sad when my family died.

Why do you have to experience the emotion yourself to understand the impact it has on others?

I didn't really like Merrill, I didn't really like Aveline, and Ander's behaviour nearing the end of the game was just out of character from the templar roasting lovable blonde guy from DA:A.. But i suppose ustice might have influnced it. Although, a spirit of justice probably wouldn't blow up the house of god, and the people inside

That's your call, but Anders hates the Chantry and always has. The Chantry isn't just a harmless Church, it controls the Templars and is the source of all the anti-mage rhetoric that exists in Thedas. I don't think blowing it up is at all out of character for him.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 01 décembre 2011 - 10:41 .

[LinksOcarina]

bluebullets wrote...

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Because triggering a mage rebellion across Thedas has nothing to do with Thedas AT ALL!!!!!! Yeah, they totally weren't hinting at a growing templar vs. mage conflict in DA:O or Awakening. *rolleyes* DA2 has little to do with Grey Wardens, but to claim that the game has nothing to do with the DA universe is flat-out stupid.

It was quite obvious I meant other than the fact that the mage blew up the house of ****ing god, and started a ****ing riot, which lead to a war.
This was 30 minutes of the game, and was completely rushed, and nothing leading up to it had much to do with the conflict, when you look at the entirety of the game.

And asside from this, even this had nothing to do with anything else that was built on. It could have easily been a new franchise entirely.

No offense, but you are totally wrong and should stop posting about this.


For one, Ander's attitude and dialouge throughout Dragon Age II changed radically over the seven years. By the time we get to the justice quest you have red flags going up as to what he is planning, and what he did. And you can try to stop him, but it doesn't work (which probably miffs some people, but it happens.)

Second, you see the tensions between the mages and templars early on, right at the start with Wesley and Bethany, for that matter. You also see them work together, just like you see Meredith and Orsino compromising after the Qunari attacks, which does a sense of hope over this conflict. You see Thrask, Grace, Alrik, Fenryel Kerren, Cullen, Alain, Quentin, DuPuis, and the others involved on both sides pretty much sum up the tensions; magic is terrible, but awesome at the same time. You see people trying to live, people just killing wantonly, and still others just trying to get by with what they have.

And lastly, you see the Chantry sum it up in a nice section of dialogue, both sides have valid points, but both sides are wrong. Thats the moral crux here because yes, both sides are wrong, but they don't realize it. Elthina is probably the only one that brought balance and stability in the conflict, and her posturing to wait it out until they decided to talk to her is an old teacher tactic, wait for the students to calm down after their fight, and discuss what happened. The only wrench is Ander's growing paranoia and decision to bring "justice" once again, by eliminating a chance for compromise.

Oh and one more thing, your original post...

Fereldens living in the Free Marches for over 10 years
Flemeth escaping death and warning us whats about to happen
the Mage/Templar conflict going global
the Qunari being a boogeyman of sorts for not only Tevinter and Orlais, but now also the Free Marches
The fates of people you knew, namely Nathaniel, Zevran, Leliana and Alistar, continuing on the paths provided by Origins/Awakening.
The fact that the Darkspawn Civil War is still relevant because if the Architect still lives, it is implied he is helping the Wardens.

So don't tell me, that Bioware spent about 30 minutes building up this climax. After playing the game three times, they really put some thought into this arc here, and it shows in the writing, quest design and conclusion. Also don't say there is no connection. If anything, it feels like you WANT there to be no connection, which is just ignorance to me.

[bluebullets]

LinksOcarina wrote...

bluebullets wrote...

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Because triggering a mage rebellion across Thedas has nothing to do with Thedas AT ALL!!!!!! Yeah, they totally weren't hinting at a growing templar vs. mage conflict in DA:O or Awakening. *rolleyes* DA2 has little to do with Grey Wardens, but to claim that the game has nothing to do with the DA universe is flat-out stupid.

It was quite obvious I meant other than the fact that the mage blew up the house of ****ing god, and started a ****ing riot, which lead to a war.
This was 30 minutes of the game, and was completely rushed, and nothing leading up to it had much to do with the conflict, when you look at the entirety of the game.

And asside from this, even this had nothing to do with anything else that was built on. It could have easily been a new franchise entirely.

No offense, but you are totally wrong and should stop posting about this.


For one, Ander's attitude and dialouge throughout Dragon Age II changed radically over the seven years. By the time we get to the justice quest you have red flags going up as to what he is planning, and what he did. And you can try to stop him, but it doesn't work (which probably miffs some people, but it happens.)

Second, you see the tensions between the mages and templars early on, right at the start with Wesley and Bethany, for that matter. You also see them work together, just like you see Meredith and Orsino compromising after the Qunari attacks, which does a sense of hope over this conflict. You see Thrask, Grace, Alrik, Fenryel Kerren, Cullen, Alain, Quentin, DuPuis, and the others involved on both sides pretty much sum up the tensions; magic is terrible, but awesome at the same time. You see people trying to live, people just killing wantonly, and still others just trying to get by with what they have.

And lastly, you see the Chantry sum it up in a nice section of dialogue, both sides have valid points, but both sides are wrong. Thats the moral crux here because yes, both sides are wrong, but they don't realize it. Elthina is probably the only one that brought balance and stability in the conflict, and her posturing to wait it out until they decided to talk to her is an old teacher tactic, wait for the students to calm down after their fight, and discuss what happened. The only wrench is Ander's growing paranoia and decision to bring "justice" once again, by eliminating a chance for compromise.

Oh and one more thing, your original post...

Fereldens living in the Free Marches for over 10 years
Flemeth escaping death and warning us whats about to happen
the Mage/Templar conflict going global
the Qunari being a boogeyman of sorts for not only Tevinter and Orlais, but now also the Free Marches
The fates of people you knew, namely Nathaniel, Zevran, Leliana and Alistar, continuing on the paths provided by Origins/Awakening.
The fact that the Darkspawn Civil War is still relevant because if the Architect still lives, it is implied he is helping the Wardens.

So don't tell me, that Bioware spent about 30 minutes building up this climax. After playing the game three times, they really put some thought into this arc here, and it shows in the writing, quest design and conclusion. Also don't say there is no connection. If anything, it feels like you WANT there to be no connection, which is just ignorance to me.

Seems like Redux is better at arguing my points than me lol

As redux said, bioware failed at building up to the climax.. It doesn't feel like anything really happened until it is dropped on hawke's head in the final act. The story as a whole was poorly executed. Hawke was barely even involved with the conflict. It all seemed very vague as a whole..

I think it would've been better if hawke got to kirkwall, and immediately got in the middle of this conflict, and the stoy was much less vague and more involved.

Poor effort on bioware's part.

[OMTING52601]

Hawke's story is set in the DA-verse. Whether or not it deepens the lore or the world is, obviously, up for debate. Truthfully, Gaider and team never really intended for Hawke's story to be all that interactive. The set up for this game was an "experiment", which marketing and PR demand company folks say isn't nearly the failure that word of mouth and sales figures suggest it is. That's just how it goes. Point being, from all the interviews I've read it seemed like DA 2 was never intended to necessarily add to the lore or expand the world in the first place. It was intended as a play along vehicle to ride in while watching, much like Hawke, all this craziness go on around you and the basically dealing with the fallout. It was never about making an impact or changing the story as it was created.

That doesn't mean it has nothing to do with the DA-verse. It does, it is a part of the greater thread of Thedas. And if it'd been put out as some sort of Awakenings 2 DLC or something, I suspect it may have been received much, much differently. Bioware either lives and learns or they don't.

[Leanansidhe]

After 9 freaking months, I really, really, REALLY wish people would get over what DAII isn't, (namely, Origins) and pay attention to what it IS. This game is amazing, but people are so caught up complaining over the differences, that they're paying no actual attention to what's there.

I've been (mostly lurking) on these boards for about 11 years, now. I think I've finally had enough. The incessant hatred has just gone too far.

[GodWood]

SKRemaks wrote...
After 9 freaking months, I really, really, REALLY wish people would get over what DAII isn't, (namely, Origins) and pay attention to what it IS.

Crap?

Yeah we know.

[TEWR]

SKRemaks wrote...

After 9 freaking months, I really, really, REALLY wish people would get over what DAII isn't, (namely, Origins)

Most people -- myself among them -- weren't upset that DAII wasn't Origins. Because we didn't want Origins 2.0. We were upset because DAII had a very shoddy story.

I never wanted Origins 2.0. I just wanted a good game.

Also, if people are allowed  to continuously love the game 9 months after it's been released then the haters should be allowed to hate it continuously.

...within reason. Calling people idiots for liking something they don't like shouldn't happen.
 

and pay attention to what it IS.

A great concept with horrible implementation.

Thus, DAII is crap. 

This game is amazing, but people are so caught up complaining over the differences, that they're paying no actual attention to what's there.

It's not amazing. not to me and not to many other people.

Hawke is too reactive -- which was not what was promised to the players by devs and marketing -- and far too inactive for me to like him as a hero.

The story is supposed to not rely on the big bad evil, but it ends up relying on the big, bad, and evil idol.

It's a horrible game.

I've been (mostly lurking) on these boards for about 11 years, now. I think I've finally had enough. The incessant hatred has just gone too far.

We accept your letter of resignation

[thats1evildude]

Everything that happens in DA2 builds towards the final conflict. It's actually quite intricate how everything is inter-connected.

I'm not entirely certain why you can't see how the dots connect, ETW, because you seem like a  intelligent and genre-savvy person. But honestly, I find I'm too weary to care.  

Modifié par thats1evildude, 02 décembre 2011 - 10:40 .

[Urzon]

SKRemaks wrote...

After 9 freaking months, I really, really, REALLY wish people would get over what DAII isn't, (namely, Origins) and pay attention to what it IS. This game is amazing, but people are so caught up complaining over the differences, that they're paying no actual attention to what's there.

I've been (mostly lurking) on these boards for about 11 years, now. I think I've finally had enough. The incessant hatred has just gone too far.

Thats is how sequals work. We always compare them to the original, and we complain about the differences and changes made.

Dragon Age 2 did have its high and low points. I personally liked the new graphic, voice actors, and battle systems. What i was disappointed with was the blant reuse of settings and the lack of flow in the story.

Origins was the reverse for me. I loved the storyline and the different settings. While the battle system was slow, and the graphics was ok.

I'm only praying that Bioware brings the pros of both games together and "Wonder Twin Powers!" them to make an awesome game.... and a pool of water.

Everything that happens in DA2 builds towards the final conflict. It's actually quite intricate how everything is inter-connected.

I'm not entirely certain why you can't see how the dots connect, ETW, because you seem like a fairly intellegient and genre-savvy person. But honestly, I find too weary to care.  

It's like the difference from reading a good fantasy book vs reading the cliffnotes. We got all the connections between the events and why the characters were like they were, but it didn't have the depth like the well written novel ...if that makes sense.

Modifié par Urzon, 02 décembre 2011 - 10:40 .

[TEWR]

thats1evildude wrote...

I'm not entirely certain why you can't see how the dots connect, ETW, because you seem like a fairly intellegient and genre-savvy person. But honestly, I find too weary to care.  

Urzon wrote...
It's like the difference from reading a good fantasy book vs reading the cliffnotes. We got all the connections between the events and why the characters were like they were, but it didn't have the depth like the well written novel ...if that makes sense.

This is a good summation of how I feel. I can see the points and how they were supposed to work, but DAII failed to immerse me in such a way that I felt actual depth from the story Bioware wanted to tell. Mainly because too much was missing.

EDIT: Also, I don't know if I'd really be considered a genre-savvy person, but thanks for the compliments all the same!

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 02 décembre 2011 - 10:50 .

[kyles3]

Maria Caliban wrote...

bluebullets wrote...

Hawke was the worst "hero" in any game ever. He hadn't done anything proactive in his entire life..

I agree with Hawke not being proactive enough part and disagree with the rest.

Yeah, I get that after DA:O they didn't want to write another "Rowsdower saves us and saves all the world!" type of story, but having the player character spend nine years cleaning up crazy people's messes (except for the biggest mess, which you of course are powerless to stop) was perhaps an overcorrection on BioWare's part.

I don't agree with much of what the OP has said, but I did feel somewhat removed from the DA universe while playing DA2. However, I think this feeling is mostly to do with being confined to Kirkwall for the entire game. After travelling all over Ferelden and interacting with important characters in DA:O, playing as Hawke sometimes feels like toiling in obscurity.

Modifié par kyles3, 02 décembre 2011 - 11:15 .

[LinksOcarina]

 But to be honest, if you were living in one place for almost ten years, why would, other then the news you hear from the outside, affect you so much, especially considering what DID affect Kirkwall during that period with the mage/templar tensions and Qunari attack occurring.

I think the problem is people don't understand what type of story is being told here, which is why there is so much hate for the game in the end. It is foolish to say that the story is poorly written and implemented, because the perception of what is good and evil here is still very, very gray. Yes the idol is a maguffin in that sense, but did it really contribute to the tensions that occurred? It may have contributed to the tighter grip that Meredith put on Kirkwall, but that is honestly only speculation since in hindsight her madness is limited at best, and only overtly shown in the final quest of the game. That said, the idol is part of the story because of Hawke financing Bartrands expedition. So right off the bat, he is proactive in the first Act so he can get out of the friggin slums.

Act II he was more reactive because of the events between the Qunari and the Vicount; the Qunari asked for him personally because of what happened in Act I, which is why he was involved. And the fact of the matter is he pretty much stopped the bloodshed from continuing when he defeated the Arishok at the end thrusted him into prominance int he first place, hence is Champion Title. The point was not that he was powerless to stop it beforehand, on the contrary if you pay attention, he was trying to stop events from escalating but couldn't control them.

See the theme here yet?

 Act III continues this theme. Thats the point of real life, and it shows in the game. Kind of like how you can't control your fate in becoming a Gray Warden, or eventually fighting the Archdemon to the extant of running away like the dialogue suggested. In Origins you were thrusted into the conflict out of chance and circumstance, and became the hero because in the end your character was the godsend among those who helped in uniting the races. You only had control of how they were united and how it ended, not how it began, and when it ended your choices always seemed like the right ones.

So Hawke being reactive and not proactive in the story doesn't hold water. The original PR said Hawke was one of the most important people in the Dragon Age world, and the reason for it is not what he did, but the perception of it.

What do I mean exactly?

Well, the first clue should have been the framed narrative; we see early on the "perception" of Hawke through the typical, fantasy-style tale, no one touches him, always heroic and fighting until death, almost invincible really.

But as shown above, Hawke is very proactive, but in a reactive way. Act I is all about getting money so he takes odd-jobs to do it (i.e, kill a lot of people), Act II he is tasked to try to help in quelling the tensions between two groups, and in the end is the hero of the day because he kills the Arishok, reacting to the situation he is not supposed to have control over anyway. In Act III he, as the revered Champion, is forced to pick a side in a conflict he can't control either, not because he is powerless to stop it, but because the others involved in the conflict didn't stop themselves. He tried to stop them, to influence people, but that should have been the first red flag that things would come to a head somehow, and it would be bloody. 

 And that is if you play him neutral. In the end you are still doing jobs that affect Hawke personally, like saving your loved one from the kidnapping, or even working with Meredith to try to curtail tensions between the groups.

Point is, Hawke is proactive in a different way than the Warden, or most heroes in RPG's are, because the cirumstances are grounded more in reality than anything else. so Hawke doesn't, and should not, have all the answers. The argument is invalid because in the end, the story is supposed to be told this way; to show how Hawke came to be an important person and why he is being sought, and to cut away the romantic bull**** that usually follows tales and legends.

So the PR people didn't lie, he is the most important person in the Dragon Age world but not because of how he got there, but rather because of how he reacted to it. And that is clever storytelling because it makes the champion a normal, flawed person, like everyone else in the game, and unlike the god-send that the Warden came to be.

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 03 décembre 2011 - 12:56 .

[Heimdall]

bluebullets wrote...

Vit246 wrote...

First, the Eluvian IS a portal to a realm beyond the Fade. It was never a "demon portal" ever.

Besides that, I would actually like to pretend DA2 in its current form does not exist. Cut it off from all continuity and restart.

Yes, I think DA2 is that bad. Honestly, this is a terrible product from Bioware.

the luvian that merill repairs justs lets a demon out. 

It doesn't, though there's a good chance it might of.  Nobody except perhaps Morrigan and Flemeth fully understands what Eluvians are capable of.  It can't connect to the Fade, but it doesn't have to.  The Demon was trapped outside the Fade.  My personal theory is that the blood magic ritual the demon taught Merril to cleanse the mirror shards was actually preparing it for this purpose.

[Heimdall]

LinksOcarina wrote...

 But to be honest, if you were living in one place for almost ten years, why would, other then the news you hear from the outside, affect you so much, especially considering what DID affect Kirkwall during that period with the mage/templar tensions and Qunari attack occurring.

I think the problem is people don't understand what type of story is being told here, which is why there is so much hate for the game in the end. It is foolish to say that the story is poorly written and implemented, because the perception of what is good and evil here is still very, very gray. Yes the idol is a maguffin in that sense, but did it really contribute to the tensions that occurred? It may have contributed to the tighter grip that Meredith put on Kirkwall, but that is honestly only speculation since in hindsight her madness is limited at best, and only overtly shown in the final quest of the game. That said, the idol is part of the story because of Hawke financing Bartrands expedition. So right off the bat, he is proactive in the first Act so he can get out of the friggin slums.

Act II he was more reactive because of the events between the Qunari and the Vicount; the Qunari asked for him personally because of what happened in Act I, which is why he was involved. And the fact of the matter is he pretty much stopped the bloodshed from continuing when he defeated the Arishok at the end thrusted him into prominance int he first place, hence is Champion Title. The point was not that he was powerless to stop it beforehand, on the contrary if you pay attention, he was trying to stop events from escalating but couldn't control them.

See the theme here yet?

 Act III continues this theme. Thats the point of real life, and it shows in the game. Kind of like how you can't control your fate in becoming a Gray Warden, or eventually fighting the Archdemon to the extant of running away like the dialogue suggested. In Origins you were thrusted into the conflict out of chance and circumstance, and became the hero because in the end your character was the godsend among those who helped in uniting the races. You only had control of how they were united and how it ended, not how it began, and when it ended your choices always seemed like the right ones.

So Hawke being reactive and not proactive in the story doesn't hold water. The original PR said Hawke was one of the most important people in the Dragon Age world, and the reason for it is not what he did, but the perception of it.

What do I mean exactly?

Well, the first clue should have been the framed narrative; we see early on the "perception" of Hawke through the typical, fantasy-style tale, no one touches him, always heroic and fighting until death, almost invincible really.

But as shown above, Hawke is very proactive, but in a reactive way. Act I is all about getting money so he takes odd-jobs to do it (i.e, kill a lot of people), Act II he is tasked to try to help in quelling the tensions between two groups, and in the end is the hero of the day because he kills the Arishok, reacting to the situation he is not supposed to have control over anyway. In Act III he, as the revered Champion, is forced to pick a side in a conflict he can't control either, not because he is powerless to stop it, but because the others involved in the conflict didn't stop themselves. He tried to stop them, to influence people, but that should have been the first red flag that things would come to a head somehow, and it would be bloody. 

 And that is if you play him neutral. In the end you are still doing jobs that affect Hawke personally, like saving your loved one from the kidnapping, or even working with Meredith to try to curtail tensions between the groups.

Point is, Hawke is proactive in a different way than the Warden, or most heroes in RPG's are, because the cirumstances are grounded more in reality than anything else. so Hawke doesn't, and should not, have all the answers. The argument is invalid because in the end, the story is supposed to be told this way; to show how Hawke came to be an important person and why he is being sought, and to cut away the romantic bull**** that usually follows tales and legends.

So the PR people didn't lie, he is the most important person in the Dragon Age world but not because of how he got there, but rather because of how he reacted to it. And that is clever storytelling because it makes the champion a normal, flawed person, like everyone else in the game, and unlike the god-send that the Warden came to be.

I like you.

Still, I think most of the complaints arise more from the lack of impact of Hawke (And the player's) choices than the reactivity of it.

[Tommyspa]

@LinksOcarina Excellent post.

[standardpack]

I can't come up with witty and well put arguments like the rest of you.... but I don't want a replay of Origins. Yes, I would like to see the warden again and think it would be nice but I'm not going to defend that point to the death because of how pointless it is.

I just wanted a game that would give me an exciting game experience like Origins did, didn't have to be the same way but I was looking for a sequel that reminded me why I got into the world of Dragon Age to begin with.

This is what they posted: 'Go deeper into the world of Dragon Age with an entirely new cinematic experience that grabs hold of you from the beginning and never lets go.' (posted on the home page under 'key features.) It said WORLD of Dragon Age... where does that come in? All we traveled through was that tiny speck called Kirkwall compared to the rest of Thedas.

By itself, DAII would deserve that 8/10 rating in my opinion, but this was supposed to be the sequel to the game of the year of 2009. They went in a different direction with DAII when it wasn't needed and it ended up backfiring in their face. This game could have had a 9/10 but that chance flew out the window when they introduced 'flying ninja knights.'

I found a good summary of how I felt in this topic by Sareth Cousland.

Modifié par standardpack, 03 décembre 2011 - 03:49 .

[Todd23]

DA2 gave so many empty promises when being released, that I can't help but think that when they finished making it, they knew what they had was crap. And were just trying to sell as much as possible on the first day to still make a good profit before people found out how much of a fail it was.

[LinksOcarina]

Todd23 wrote...

DA2 gave so many empty promises when being released, that I can't help but think that when they finished making it, they knew what they had was crap. And were just trying to sell as much as possible on the first day to still make a good profit before people found out how much of a fail it was.

I apologize if this seems like a random thing, but I will bet ten to twenty years down the line, Dragon Age II will be hailed as a classic game that really put forth changes and effort in how games are made, a revolutionary game, as it were.

Not by design though, but by stroy elements and how it was told. 

Because honestly, how many stories have been told like this, and I don't mean good or bad stories, I mean more of the vein of a humane, more grounded narrative, in video games? I can only think of two others really, Heavy Rain and L.A Noire, both of which were moderate successes and lukewarm hits, depending on who you ask. 

Does that make them bad? Different yes, but if you go into it with a different mindset, it becomes an experience that really does push the medium a bit.

The only real failing Dragon Age II had is the fact that the gameplay takes a backseat to the story, believe it or not. Its good gameplay, but the lack of environments, the inventory system, the inbalances and little inconsistancies between classes and such all add up a bit.

I am sorry if im preaching, but Dragon Age II really is among the top 5 releases of the year for me, it had such a good story, atmosphere and level up mechanics that I couldn't help but play it several times. Call me what you like on that one, but let's be honest, if we keep talking about like this 9 months after it's release, it did leave an impact on people, good or ill, which already is a mark of a memorable game.

[Pistolized]

It is rare to see a hatred so blinding. Unless you look on the internet. A land where everything is either gold or dung.  
It is also rare to see a person willing to consider the other side of an argument, at all.  Or to admit even the slightest fault, ever.  Or to use their education to produce a disambiguous statement, or to back up that statement without a fallacy.  The Dragon Age world may be steps from anarchy, war, and armageddon, but I fear for our world more.

Anyway,
I'm sure if Bioware could speak (not marketing), it would say that it is sorry for trying something new.  Sorry for attempting to create story arcs which span multiple games.  Sorry for telling a tale of a bard telling his tale instead of using a traditional fantasy template.  Sorry for attempting to add excitement to the battlefield.  Sorry for focusing on different cultures and locales.  Sorry for trying at all.

Because you apparently get no points for trying to improve or be poetic or be different...  People didn't like their product and they are now incompetent...   
It's not the thought that counts anymore.

P.S.  I intentionally neglect specific strengths and weaknesses I perceive in the game, for that disrupts the flow of ideas and overall goal of the post.  And sorry for the lecture.

[Mark of the Dragon]

Ok people can hate DA2, thats there opinion. To claim it has no connections however, that just makes them look bad. I mean gameplay was totally different of course but as far as content it is definitly related. Hawke isnt supposed to be some big huge "hero" like the Warden in fact it seems he is viewed by many as the bad guy that started this war. Honestly I agree with you that Hawke is a crappy protagonist and it made it hard to care at times but the game does help flesh out the world... well Kirkwall at least. It also ends in a way that will lead up to another epic game in DA3.

Dragon age is about Thedas. When we play games we are there to learn about it and help affect its future. Its not really about the main character. Now I do think Bioware was misleading us by "overstating" Hawkes importance when the game first released. I mean Hawke didnt do anything really he was just kinda their. I do also agree that they need a better hero in DA3. However this game has its importance and its here to stay so dont bag on it cause you did not like it.

Oh yes may I suggest DLC it really adds to the games value in my opinion!

[Todd23]

My point, is that they said things such as, that with a preset origin you have more room to make your own decisions, and that in DA2 we will be able to make much more choices. They said that are decisions would shape, not only the world around us, but our own character. Yet the game can't even seem to comprehend why I would be strict when telling someone what to do, but then nice when their spouse dies. It's all or nothing. The warden's character was more controllable. Without a wheel. If you watch those old videos and podcasts, you'll see why I'm so "disambiguous" (not a real word). So let's review, a game, that had Dragon Age fans pumped about, and was promised to keep what they liked about it. Doesn't keep what they like about it, keeps characters, but your previous decisions about them are thrown out the window (some having too much of a make-over, like Isabela turning from a ginger to this). So I'm sorry for not giving them credit for WANTING to make a good game. When all the stuff they said they had in it that DAO fans wanted, weren't really in it at all. This game seems like the first game of a DBZ budokai series, where everyone know it's not that good (which doesn't stop the creators to advertise like it's the best yet). But it's instead laying down the work for a really good game.

[esper]

How is it all or nothing about your Hawke's personality? The game certainly allowed my Hawke to be in whatever mood she was in. It even allowed my to evolved her character and make her more agressive in act 3, when she had 'toughen up'...