23 réponses à ce sujet

[Melithea]

 
   First of all I'd like to say I love Dragon Age. I bought Dragon Age:Origins a while ago on X-Box and although I was heartbroken that all of my decisions were bugged by the end of the game so that I could not see an ending that fit the choices I made, I loved the journey so played it many times with new characters and just avoided the end. I really liked how the story events changed with my characters whims and I thought, despite the game breaking bugs, it was a great game.

   Fast forward to a few weeks ago and I bought the Dragon Age Ultimate Edition for PC. I loved the game so much that I wanted to see MY endings and I had heard the modders fixed most of the bugs for the PC. Plus, despite the fact that I had no interest in any of the expansions (and still don't) I wanted to make sure I had all the resources I needed to mod my own story. So I beat the game and despite the fact that a few bugs still exist I am really happy to finally have MY ending. So I start mapping out my own mod.

   But, it gets to the point that modding and the learning curve for using this toolset is frying my brain a bit so I want to get another game to give my brain a break in-between modding. I head to the store and despite the fact that I had almost no interest in Dragon Age 2 I see it with a bright glowy green sticker for $19.95 and I can't resist. I buy it and figure the modders probably had a field day with it and fixed most of the initial problems I had with it.

   I was right! Despite a few things that annoyed me (I'm picky, so it's bound to happen) I loved the story and it was WELL worth the $20 and it gave me some great ideas to make my mod even better. I loved it so much in fact that I made a new character and was ready to get on the ride again.

   But I am a cautious creature and had made some mental notes on parts of the story I wanted to change, like I had done with Dragon Age:Origins and looked up spoilers on how to make sure I got the changes I wanted. The first I looked up could not be changed no matter what decision I made and I was devastated but understood the need to have it even though I never, never, NEVER want to see it again... EVER (Hawke's mom )  So I look up the others. It turns out NONE of the story changes I looked up were changeable... at all. None of them. Not one. And I had quite a few. So it seems to me, the only choices that make a difference is who I romance (which is a REALLY important one I agree) and who's side I choose in the end...

   Really? All those decisions I made were pointless? It was just a ploy to make us feel like our decisions mattered but in the end it was just role playing?

   So at this point I've put the game down and I don't have any interest in another playthrough. The story was good but not THAT good. And yet again I have no interest in the expansions, because honestly, RPGs are a dime a dozen. Bioware has good story tellers but not great. What pulled me to the Neverwinter, Dragon Age and Mass Effect stories was the "full meal deal" that no other company could offer. Ripe with epic, choose-your-own adventure romance stories. There is no other company that offers that, but the expansions are just basic choose-your-own adventure side plots, so again - thank you for them, but I'll pass for now (especially since I can't use the resources in a toolset).

   So I'm just curious, is there something I missed? Do the decisions actually matter, other than making people think you're either nice or an ass? Or is this game just one of those you enjoy and shelve? (Btw it was still totally worth the money, just disappointed about the re-playability)

[caradoc2000]

Melithea wrote...

 So I'm just curious, is there something I missed? Do the decisions actually matter

No.

[whykikyouwhy]

There are things that can't be changed - the final conflict is going to happen regardless of what you do. Hawke is caught up in all manner of strange circumstances that (s)he can influence (directly or indirectly through interactions with companions and NPCs for example), but not alter completely.

Ultimately, DA2 is about the *journey* of your Hawke through the plotline. How (s)he gets from point A to point B, and what that says about the character itself and how (s)he interacts with the world (s)he is in.

[SpockLives]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

Ultimately, DA2 is about the *journey* of your Hawke through the plotline. How (s)he gets from point A to point B, and what that says about the character itself and how (s)he interacts with the world (s)he is in.

That would be fine, except that isn't the game Bioware advertised before release.  My biggest complaint about DA2 is that Hawke has no agency, no ability to affect his or her world (or even one little city).  Bioware told fans during the game's production that the framed narrative would allow players to see how their choices affect the city and shape events.  No longer would players have to wait until the end to find out what happens.  Sadly, not a single one of Hawke's choices matter.  All dialogue options lead to the same results.  Instead of DA2 giving players more ability to influence the game world, we had less.

Contrast that to Origins.  Bioware tells us that we had to wait until the end to see how our choices matter by reading those end-game slides.  But I can list many things that have an immediate and significant impact, and players don't have to wait until the end to find out the results of their choices.

Warning:  Major DA:O Spoilers to follow.

The Circle Tower - The Warden got to choose whether an entire Circle of Mages gets annulled.  True, we don't see it happen, but the choice is made immediately and effects are felt before the end of the game.

Redcliff - Help the boy or kill him?  Have the mages (if spared) send you into the Fade or kill Isolde.  Again, the choice has immediate results, although the arl will help you regardless of your choice.

Haven - Preserve or destroy the Ashes of Andraste?  I guess DA2 has something similar with the book of the Qun.

Orzamar - Bhelen or Harrowmont, preserve or destroy the Anvil?  Before you leave the city, there is a new king.  Perhaps siding with the Templars in DA2 to become Viscount is similar, but the DA:O choice feels more significant.  I will explain why below.

The Brecillian Forest - Kill or cure the werewolves, or kill the elves?  Again, a major choice with immediate effects: you get to wipe out or cure an entire community of people.

DA2's choices simply can't compare to the ones in DA:O.  I was ok with the idea of DA2 being on a much smaller scale, but not with having no real choices.  Even if Hawke becomes Viscount, he or she still has to flee the city and hide at the end.  Regardless of who you side with, they will turn against you.  For a DA:O comparison, imagine if after you helped the mages, the elves, and the dwarves that they all turned against you and you had to fight them in addition to the Archdemon.  Why bother siding with anyone if everyone you help will betray you?  A single betrayal can be a powerful plot twist (think Anders).  But when every-frikken-body in the game goes completely nuts and betrays you for no reason, that isn't a plot twist.  It's terrible writing.

[whykikyouwhy]

SpockLives wrote...

That would be fine, except that isn't the game Bioware advertised before release.  My biggest complaint about DA2 is that Hawke has no agency, no ability to affect his or her world (or even one little city).  Bioware told fans during the game's production that the framed narrative would allow players to see how their choices affect the city and shape events.  No longer would players have to wait until the end to find out what happens.  Sadly, not a single one of Hawke's choices matter.  All dialogue options lead to the same results.  Instead of DA2 giving players more ability to influence the game world, we had less.

Contrast that to Origins.  Bioware tells us that we had to wait until the end to see how our choices matter by reading those end-game slides.  But I can list many things that have an immediate and significant impact, and players don't have to wait until the end to find out the results of their choices.

Warning:  Major DA:O Spoilers to follow.

The Circle Tower - The Warden got to choose whether an entire Circle of Mages gets annulled.  True, we don't see it happen, but the choice is made immediately and effects are felt before the end of the game.

Redcliff - Help the boy or kill him?  Have the mages (if spared) send you into the Fade or kill Isolde.  Again, the choice has immediate results, although the arl will help you regardless of your choice.

Haven - Preserve or destroy the Ashes of Andraste?  I guess DA2 has something similar with the book of the Qun.

Orzamar - Bhelen or Harrowmont, preserve or destroy the Anvil?  Before you leave the city, there is a new king.  Perhaps siding with the Templars in DA2 to become Viscount is similar, but the DA:O choice feels more significant.  I will explain why below.

The Brecillian Forest - Kill or cure the werewolves, or kill the elves?  Again, a major choice with immediate effects: you get to wipe out or cure an entire community of people.

DA2's choices simply can't compare to the ones in DA:O.  I was ok with the idea of DA2 being on a much smaller scale, but not with having no real choices.  Even if Hawke becomes Viscount, he or she still has to flee the city and hide at the end.  Regardless of who you side with, they will turn against you.  For a DA:O comparison, imagine if after you helped the mages, the elves, and the dwarves that they all turned against you and you had to fight them in addition to the Archdemon.  Why bother siding with anyone if everyone you help will betray you?  A single betrayal can be a powerful plot twist (think Anders).  But when every-frikken-body in the game goes completely nuts and betrays you for no reason, that isn't a plot twist.  It's terrible writing.

Ok...

I'm tired, so I'm going to cut and paste something I wrote up a few months back, but I feel still resonates (with me). This was written specifically to address whether or not Hawke was a hero - (intentional bolding for this purpose here)...

- - - - -

But no matter what path you take (diplomatic, sarcastic, or aggressive), you take Hawke on a journey. The horizon isn’t all stardust and rainbows and wealth and lofty castles, but it was never meant to be. The story presented in DA2, imo, was supposed to be the tale of a refugee who came to a city, rose in station and wealth, affected the lives of those around him/her, and wound up being a figurehead in events that will eventually lead to some great and grand cataclysmic shaking of the known world. That journey, so parallel in some ways to real life, can be, and is heroic.

Hawke doesn’t get to save everyone, no. And more’s the pity considering who (s)he doesn’t get to rescue. But (s)he prevents harm from befalling many – people who you encounter in successive acts, and whose lives have changed, if even ever so slightly, because of Hawke’s influence/actions (Seamus, Orana, Lia, Charade, Donnic, Feynriel, Alain, etc). Those people are a ripple effect – we don’t have a fancy scrolling epilogue at the end of DA2 to inform us how these individuals may later make their mark upon the world, but we may yet encounter (some of) them in games to come and hear tale of their deeds. With each quest undertaken, Hawke potentially saves lives in the process, or prevents further damage/harm to the people of Kirkwall. We don’t get to see that, no. There are no cheering crowds save for the one at the end of the Arishok duel.

Hawke doesn’t save Kirkwall in the standard sense. At the end of Act 3, Kirkwall is in a state of upheaval, but that was a pot already on its way to boiling over. Some have argued that Hawke should have been more active in preventing the mage/templar schism and the Big Chantry Fireworks show. A valid point and concern. But at the core of this game, and any other, a story is being told. Not our story – we’re just along for the ride (so therefore, the scenery from the road taken may not always suit us). The finale of Act 3 was, imo, a piece of a larger puzzle. We were never meant to stop it. We were meant to bear witness to it – to see both sides of the events leading up to it because that’s probably going to be incredibly significant later on in the sprawling cycle of the Dragon Age. The city had to fall, just as Denerim had to be practically razed, just as Amaranthine or the Keep had to be stomped upon. Something has to topple for something new to be built in its place. (Something other than Flemeth will rise from the ashes.)

- - - - -
You're entitled to your opinion. Personally, I didn't find the writing horrible. I enjoyed the game, 4 playthroughs worth of enjoyment, in fact.

[Melithea]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

The story presented in DA2, imo, was supposed to be the tale of a refugee who came to a city, rose in station and wealth, affected the lives of those around him/her, and wound up being a figurehead in events that will eventually lead to some great and grand cataclysmic shaking of the known world.

While I understand where you're coming from and I agree that the story told in DA2 was very good... it's not Bioware good and it's not what we've come to expect in Bioware's "Choose-your-own Adventure" style games.

   Despite the game and story being well put together, RPG story games are a dime a dozen and easy to find. The savior, in my opinion, of DA2 is that they at least had the romance options in the games that still can't be found anywhere else. (The Fable series and Skyrim tried but ultimatley failed with their efforts to join the Bioware romance train) And if you don't mind having no real impact on the story due to the choices you make, there are much better RPG game options out there with much better story telling. I'm not as interested in those types of games as, I could just as easily pick up a good book and get the same entertainment lacking only the synimatics and hours of mass murdering monsters and bad guys as story filler.

   As I said, DA2 was well worth the money but I don't play Bioware games to be taken on a journey. I play them to make my own journey.

[Addai]

Melithea wrote...
   So I'm just curious, is there something I missed? Do the decisions actually matter, other than making people think you're either nice or an ass? Or is this game just one of those you enjoy and shelve?

No, and yes.

Do yourself a favor and quit while you're not too disappointed.

[Ponendus]

Melithea wrote...

   So I'm just curious, is there something I missed? Do the decisions actually matter, other than making people think you're either nice or an ass? Or is this game just one of those you enjoy and shelve? (Btw it was still totally worth the money, just disappointed about the re-playability)

Unfortunately that was my experience. I enjoyed it immensely, was disappointed by the ending because nothing I decided mattered anyway and it took me a long time to replay.

Try to remember what a fantastic story it is and enjoy it for what it is, and if you feel that's all you can get, move on. Next instalment will hopefully have more staying power for you (and all of us).

Modifié par Ponendus, 12 décembre 2011 - 02:44 .

[Melithea]

Ponendus wrote...
 Next instalment will hopefully have more staying power for you (and all of us).

I have high hopes. It is Bioware after all right?

[Ponendus]

Melithea wrote...

Ponendus wrote...
 Next instalment will hopefully have more staying power for you (and all of us).

I have high hopes. It is Bioware after all right?

That's the spirit! Indeed it is.

[jbrand2002uk]

I have to say i agree with whykikyyouwhy the changes in DA2 were clearly to radical for some but does that make it bad? No BW kind of dug its own hole in this case, for too long their games have given players too much freedom and variation to the point where they keep expecting more of the same time and again.

Consider this, pick a movie you like any one at all and watch it once or twice chances are you still be entertained by the end of the second playthrough now imagine every other movie in the Genre was alike, similar characters and story etc. For awhile you might think this is a good thing but over time you'd gradually become bored KOTOR was a great game in its day but that was many many moons ago now fast forward a few years to when DAO was released and all that hype about it being innovative etc but alas this is a fallacy what you have is still KOTOR except the lightsabers have been swapped for swords and staffs the scenery's a little different and the names have changed.

Apart from that its the same tired old formula hashed up again and again to please the pandering majority of the existing customer base and there's nothing worse than the lack of creativity which is why despite its flaws I enjoy DA2 because while the changes were nowhere near as massive as many claim it was different enough from the repeat ad nauseum formula that RPG developers have been cloning for over a decade

[hoorayforicecream]

There's a good number of choices that make a difference, mostly with the companions. Aveline can get married, you can sell Fenris back to Danarius, you can give Isabela to the Arishok, and the whole friendship/rivalry dynamic offers pretty significantly different views on the characters. That mattered more to me than seeing epilogue placards, or affecting the greater story as a whole.

That's probably why I didn't like the Witcher 2, the opposite is true there - you can affect the politics and stuff (well, kind of), but your choices have practically no effect on the characters themselves.

[Maugrim]

Making choices is somewhat like praying to God (or if your George Carlin, Joe Pesci!). Sometimes the answer/whether it makes a difference is 'Yes.', 'Yes but not how you expect' sometimes it's 'No.', and sometimes it's 'Maybe later'

We get it a lot of people don't like it when they don't get "Yes" all the damn time. I guess it reminds them to much of reality. Personally I kinda liked it, I think it worked for this game and this story. In my experience all the kvetching isn't over choices, it's about results so it's hard to take the subsequent vitriol seriously.

[Firky]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

you can sell Fenris back to Danarius,

I did not know that.

Despite that many people would disagree, I thought the choices and consequences were clever, and thought provoking, in DAII, if not absolutely brilliant. But, yeah, different. Not narrative, more subtle, evolving, and often based on companions, like ice cream says. They weren't as explicit as having 2 distinct paths to follow - like in The Witcher 2, but I thought it was immediately obvious in The Witcher 2, that you were heading to either side of the map in Act II and then being brought back together in Act III (which is fine, and it was fun etc, but to be expected.)

In DAII, I certainly noticed that the main plot was a pretty straight line. I think I noticed that the first time you met Varric and had no option to refuse him. But, little things pop up along the way that alter your experience of the game. I was quite horrified to find drunk Alistair with a different import, for example. And have to fight - um - that thief guy from the gallows before you get into Kirkwall that I let go free. That was a shocking fight.

In my first game, Isabela didn't even make it to the Arishok. She was long gone, and I have no idea why - likely something to do with me not being friends with her? In my first game, I couldn't talk Fenris out of going with the opposite side. I'd rivalmanced him. So, more based on aspects of gameplay than narrative choices? The fact that I'm not sure is good. (In my opinion.)

The game turned out to be a confusing combination of stuff that made a big difference and stuff you were powerless to control which I found refreshing. (I'm used to, like, Baldur's Gate, where you go with the vampires or go with the thieves, or Origins where you do the quest and then pick one side or the other.)

Also, the choices in DAII had lots of weight. Like, the bit where you have to choose whether to crack onto Fenris when he was totally stonkered was full on (in my experience). In the end, if you did he would refuse you, and the outcomes were the same, but the choice made me stop for ages and think it through.

PS. Oh, oh. And I love the really brutal consequences that are based on seemingly arbitrary choices. Like, choice of class decides the death of a sibling. I had no idea that was even the case on my first time through. Terrible and brilliant at the same time. And then, you take the remaining sibling to the Deep Roads without Anders and - well, spoiler. In reference to the OP, I can totally understand why trying to find a way to save the mum would be frustrating, if you really wanted to save the mum, but I was just going with the flow of the game, and experiencing the powerlessness and unexpected consequences - in a genre where I'm not that surprised very often these days - and it worked great on me.

Modifié par Firky, 13 décembre 2011 - 09:08 .

[brightblueink]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

There's a good number of choices that make a difference, mostly with the companions. Aveline can get married, you can sell Fenris back to Danarius, you can give Isabela to the Arishok, and the whole friendship/rivalry dynamic offers pretty significantly different views on the characters. That mattered more to me than seeing epilogue placards, or affecting the greater story as a whole.

That's probably why I didn't like the Witcher 2, the opposite is true there - you can affect the politics and stuff (well, kind of), but your choices have practically no effect on the characters themselves.

Ah, I see. I've never thought of it this way, but...yeah, that makes sense. When it comes right down to it, whenever I consume pretty much any form of fiction I'm the most interested in the characters...so I care more about the choices I get to make where they affect the characters, than affecting the politics of something. That might be one of the reasons why I ended up enjoying DA2 a bit more than DA:O, come to think of it.

[jbrand2002uk]

And thats what i find so refreshing in DA2 in too many games you get to have your cake and eat it by being able to prevent some events from happening DA2 kicks the player into touch and spells it out that even a hero cant save everyone and stop everything and i find that a refreshing change

[frostajulie]

SpockLives wrote...

whykikyouwhy wrote...

Ultimately, DA2 is about the *journey* of your Hawke through the plotline. How (s)he gets from point A to point B, and what that says about the character itself and how (s)he interacts with the world (s)he is in.

That would be fine, except that isn't the game Bioware advertised before release.  My biggest complaint about DA2 is that Hawke has no agency, no ability to affect his or her world (or even one little city).  Bioware told fans during the game's production that the framed narrative would allow players to see how their choices affect the city and shape events.  No longer would players have to wait until the end to find out what happens.  Sadly, not a single one of Hawke's choices matter.  All dialogue options lead to the same results.  Instead of DA2 giving players more ability to influence the game world, we had less.

Contrast that to Origins.  Bioware tells us that we had to wait until the end to see how our choices matter by reading those end-game slides.  But I can list many things that have an immediate and significant impact, and players don't have to wait until the end to find out the results of their choices.

Warning:  Major DA:O Spoilers to follow.

The Circle Tower - The Warden got to choose whether an entire Circle of Mages gets annulled.  True, we don't see it happen, but the choice is made immediately and effects are felt before the end of the game.

Redcliff - Help the boy or kill him?  Have the mages (if spared) send you into the Fade or kill Isolde.  Again, the choice has immediate results, although the arl will help you regardless of your choice.

Haven - Preserve or destroy the Ashes of Andraste?  I guess DA2 has something similar with the book of the Qun.

Orzamar - Bhelen or Harrowmont, preserve or destroy the Anvil?  Before you leave the city, there is a new king.  Perhaps siding with the Templars in DA2 to become Viscount is similar, but the DA:O choice feels more significant.  I will explain why below.

The Brecillian Forest - Kill or cure the werewolves, or kill the elves?  Again, a major choice with immediate effects: you get to wipe out or cure an entire community of people.

DA2's choices simply can't compare to the ones in DA:O.  I was ok with the idea of DA2 being on a much smaller scale, but not with having no real choices.  Even if Hawke becomes Viscount, he or she still has to flee the city and hide at the end.  Regardless of who you side with, they will turn against you.  For a DA:O comparison, imagine if after you helped the mages, the elves, and the dwarves that they all turned against you and you had to fight them in addition to the Archdemon.  Why bother siding with anyone if everyone you help will betray you?  A single betrayal can be a powerful plot twist (think Anders).  But when every-frikken-body in the game goes completely nuts and betrays you for no reason, that isn't a plot twist.  It's terrible writing.

And this is why DA2 is a bit of bread and water while DA:O is a Thanksgiving feast of awesomesauce.  DA@ had a lot of improvements and was very enjoyable but was only good for 4 or 5 playthrus and I can't even stand to look at it anymore.  Unfortunatley I am having a hard time returning to DA:O style combat. But I have played DA:O for nearly 3 years over and over and over again and the story keeps gripping you with the various permutations. Truly we will not see its like again.

[Realmzmaster]

SpockLives wrote...


DA2's choices simply can't compare to the ones in DA:O.  I was ok with the idea of DA2 being on a much smaller scale, but not with having no real choices.  Even if Hawke becomes Viscount, he or she still has to flee the city and hide at the end.  Regardless of who you side with, they will turn against you.  For a DA:O comparison, imagine if after you helped the mages, the elves, and the dwarves that they all turned against you and you had to fight them in addition to the Archdemon.  Why bother siding with anyone if everyone you help will betray you?  A single betrayal can be a powerful plot twist (think Anders).  But when every-frikken-body in the game goes completely nuts and betrays you for no reason, that isn't a plot twist.  It's terrible writing.

If Hawke becomes Viscount he/she chooses to leave. He/she does not have to leave. The templars all take a knee to a pro-templar Hawke. The pro-mage Hawke has to flee because there is no other choice. The Chantry will be sending more templars and commanders to quall the rebellion.

The choices in DA2 effect people on a more personal level. For example Feynriel, Hawke can give him to the demon (Torpor), make him tranquil, or save him and convince him to master himself. If you give him to the Torpor it has an immediate effect later in the game ( the demon possessed Feynriel will drive people mad through their dreams). If you make him Tranquil (by killing him in the Fade) it has an immediate effect in the game (his mother kills herself). If Hawke saves Feynriel he/she will get a letter in game from Feynriel stating how he is doing.

There are other example, such as helping or not helping Aveline with Donnic. Or a hold over from DAO except this time with Sebastian. If you as Anders to join you after he blows up the Chantry Sebastian leaves the party and goes back to Starkhaven and threatens both Anders and Hawke.

The part I like about DA2 is that you receive letters in game telling what has happen to the people Hawke helped.

As far as choices in DAO they have no immediate effect on the game. The primary goal of the Warden is to get an army it does not matter what side you choose in any of the decisions you will get an army from that group. The composition of that army will be different, but the overall effect is the same , gather an army to defeat the ArchDemon and end the Blight. The only time you know your choices made any difference is in epilogue slides.

Now, if the allowing Redcliffe to be destroyed had lead to the lost of part of the army that would be an in game effect.

I like both DAO and DA2. I like DA2 more because of the effect on a personal level and the fact that Hawke cannot solve all the problems. In like in Legacy (if you play it during the third act) he is talking to the spirit of his mother. She says like his father he trys to do good. It may not alwys work out, but he tries. For me the journey is more important than the destination, I like the fact that Bioware gave a protagonist that no matter how hard he/she tries some or all events are out of his/her control.

I find it a contrast from the warden, who is able to solve every proble.

[Fast Jimmy]

^
I agree it is nice to have a hero who cannot solve everything.

However, giving us no different option to pursue failure doesn't help either. We are locked into the way things play out with your first sibling and your mother. If there was a different way to fail, instead of just the one way to not succeed, I think that would have been a preferred method.

I don't really like the fact that people are mentioning things like (SPOILER) you can sell out Isabella to Qunari or (literally) sell out Fenris to his former master. While done slightly better, these still boil down to you being able to kick out members of your party in DAO. No one, in my experience, has ever gushed about having the ability to yell at Morrigan until she leaves. Even Morrigan haters don't bring this up as a plus.

If one of the prime examples of "choice" in DA2 is getting rid of NPC companions, which does nothing but hinder the gameplay and excise narrative from the game, an overall negative action, then that is a poor choice indeed.

Also, in regards to Feynriel... seeing a woman we never see again commit suicide does not bother me in the least. Nor does it bother me killing Merril's clan or sparing them, as they disappear completely either way when you complete her quest. And both examples are never mentioned in the game again, ever. Feynriel's possession by the demon creating the crazed people later is the only example of choice in game having any real effect in the world.

And I guess that may be a big difference between some. DA2 does have a lot of things that affect your companions. Maybe more than DAO, maybe less, depending on your perspective and the fact that DAO has epilogue slides that show their future. Regardless, I was more excited to see the random people I affected in DAO's game and ending rather than hearing about my companions.

Telling me about how Behlin killed and kidnapped topsiders to create more golems? Do tell! Having me watch as my companion is sold out to his former master? Meh. He was a bit of a sullen whiner anyway.

Give me how I changed the world any day of the week. I've seen enough of my companions. Besides, the fact that my companions are likely dead in a ditch after selling them out, doesn't that make it impossible (or at least difficult) for Bioware to have them show up in any future DLC, expansions or sequels? The people who care enough to play multiple times to see their companions reactions won't want to play a DLC where their favorite NPCs are dead or gone.

[brightblueink]

But for the most part we DIDN'T see how things were actually affected by our choices in DA:O, either. We'd hear rumors or we got a little card in the epilogue saying "this happened" (and half of those don't even work). They can't allow our choices to matter too much to the world, anyway, since that would make things really complicated with game importing. I'd rather my choices actually make a difference to individual people than hear a choice maybe made an impact, only to have it later explained away because they needed a town to be important in the next game so they had to make it somewhat standardized. (Not that character-related choices don't get retconned sometimes, too, like Leiliana. It's hard for me to care too much about the choices when Bioware themselves know they have to limit or retcon them to continue the series.)

[Morroian]

brightblueink wrote...

But for the most part we DIDN'T see how things were actually affected by our choices in DA:O, either. We'd hear rumors or we got a little card in the epilogue saying "this happened" (and half of those don't even work).

Yes this was the illusion of choice in DAO.

[brightblueink]

I felt willing to sacrifice some of the illusion of choice because I don't think Hawke themselves had much of an illusion of choice in a lot of the game. I understand why people find that unsatisfying, but I thought it fit well with the themes and the story of the game. Hawke does the best that he/she can, but often they feel just as powerless as the player does. It seemed to me like it was, in part, a story-driven choice (although I also wouldn't be surprised if some of the possible options were scrapped because of how rushed the game was).

I know that's not common in a western style RPG game, and I know that since the first game built up the expectation of having an illusion of grand, epic choices that fans were disappointed because of it. And I understand that (despite my sometimes overzealous defending of DA2). But I think realizing that my character was feeling just as helpless as I was in some parts of the game, but soldiering on despite it, endeared the game to me. I just wish the rest of the game was polished enough to hold up the story.

[Fylimar]

I agree with whykikyyouwhy. And personally, I liked it, that my character couldn't change everything and wasn't the most important person around. It felt more real. When I played KOTOR, I was disapointed, that you had to play a force user - and not enough, you were one of the most powerful force users in game. In BG you were the child of a god - and in DAO the survival of Ferelden depends on you. It's always end of the world and you have to be the savior. In DA2 Anders would have lost it and had done something terrible, Meredith and Orsino would have get at each others throat regardless of you, and I guess the Arishok could very well have been defeated by Aveline, Orsino, Meredith or maybe Fenris - or Bethany and/or Carver. It didn't have to be Hawke. Your character was just at the right place (or wrong place) at the right time - it was coincidence. That was what I liked most in DA2. Instead, you influenced the lifes of your friends and of some people you met - which felt much more satisfieing to me.