1306 réponses à ce sujet

[Pasquale1234]

TjM78 wrote...

Also Verric is the man

Funny, isn't it - that Varric and Aveline seem to be the more popular characters, and they are the ones who used standard body models, whose iconic looks did not stand out so much, and neither one of them seemed to be obsessed with anything in particular.

[TjM78]

I loved his dry wit

[Elhanan]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Funny, isn't it - that Varric and Aveline seem to be the more popular characters, and they are the ones who used standard body models, whose iconic looks did not stand out so much, and neither one of them seemed to be obsessed with anything in particular.

No strong obsessions perhaps, but Varric; as the unbearded Dwarf in a V-neck with repeating crossbow, and Aveline; as the non-glamoured soldier of honor do stand out from the crowd a little.

[TjM78]

I also loved

"I am going to find that son of a ****......Sorry mother"

[Realmzmaster]

Elhanan wrote...

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Funny, isn't it - that Varric and Aveline seem to be the more popular characters, and they are the ones who used standard body models, whose iconic looks did not stand out so much, and neither one of them seemed to be obsessed with anything in particular.

No strong obsessions perhaps, but Varric; as the unbearded Dwarf in a V-neck with repeating crossbow, and Aveline; as the non-glamoured soldier of honor do stand out from the crowd a little.

That may be because Varric and Aveline seem to be the most normal of the party members. I do think we as gamers do like to associate with normal. Anders, Fenris, Sebastin and to a degree Isabela seem more out of the norm.

Anders and Fenris are consumed with hate and a myopic view point. Sebastin seems blindly devoted to the Maker. Isabela while closer to normal has trust issues. Varric and Aveline would have Hawke's back.

[Pasquale1234]

Realmzmaster wrote...

That may be because Varric and Aveline seem to be the most normal of the party members. I do think we as gamers do like to associate with normal. Anders, Fenris, Sebastin and to a degree Isabela seem more out of the norm.

Anders and Fenris are consumed with hate and a myopic view point. Sebastin seems blindly devoted to the Maker. Isabela while closer to normal has trust issues. Varric and Aveline would have Hawke's back.

Excellent points.

I've often thought these may be some of the reasons why so many people have said they see the DAO companions as having been somehow richer and deeper.  They seemed more subtle, and I feel that the fact that we could customize them made them seem more "normal" - customization not only in terms of appearance but also fewer restrictions on skills.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Filament wrote...

If DAO characters had strong opinions they were more superceded by the threat of the darkspawn. In DA2 their strong opinions are directly related to whether they ultimately want to help you or not.

And yet they still hung around for years, despite having no reason at all to do so.

It's not that they weren't likeable.  It's that they were shallow.  They were little more than constructs of gameplay convenience.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 15 mars 2012 - 05:35 .

[Elhanan]

Realmzmaster wrote...

That may be because Varric and Aveline seem to be the most normal of the party members. I do think we as gamers do like to associate with normal. Anders, Fenris, Sebastin and to a degree Isabela seem more out of the norm.

Anders and Fenris are consumed with hate and a myopic view point. Sebastin seems blindly devoted to the Maker. Isabela while closer to normal has trust issues. Varric and Aveline would have Hawke's back.

Edit: me

heh! No need to limit that to gamers; folks simply tire of emo constantly, IMO.

But I see Sebastian as being disliked more for his religious worldview; not his devoted nature, as he is constantly torn between the the roles of 'Priest' vs Prince. Personally, I liked him until near the conclusion when he became more polarizing in his attitude.

[Kavatica]

TjM78 wrote...

I also loved

"I am going to find that son of a ****......Sorry mother"

This makes me laugh every time. I also love his line about kingdom and country.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Filament wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

It's not that they weren't likeable.  It's that they were shallow.

Based on what?

What is there to Fenris beyond waiting for that slaver?  And why is he helping Hawke?  Why is he at Hawke's beck and call for years?

[Kavatica]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Filament wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

It's not that they weren't likeable.  It's that they were shallow.

Based on what?

What is there to Fenris beyond waiting for that slaver?  And why is he helping Hawke?  Why is he at Hawke's beck and call for years?

Well, if he's not in love with  you, it's because he respects Hawke and feels like he owes Hawke for helping him gain his freedom.

[Elhanan]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

And yet they still hung around for years, despite having no reason at all to do so.

It's not that they weren't likeable.  It's that they were shallow.  They were little more than constructs of gameplay convenience.

Here I disagree:

* Anders/ Justice - stays due to Mages being abused, imprisoned, and made Tranquil; not one to run any more.

* Aveline - is accepted and fills a need during a time of grief and loss; also a valuable and devoted friend.

* Fenris - waiting for vengeance against former Master; may actually speak of this while at home, but am uncertain.

* Isabela - dry docked, and looking for something.

* Merrill - is close to her former camp, and is restoring something.

* Sebastian - seems to have strong ties with this Chantry; seems almost like a resident.

* Varric - another loyal friend; already living there.

Even Isabela - who I find to be the most offensive - is not shallow, but treats herself that way; likes to play the role as it easier than close ties.

[Realmzmaster]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Filament wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

It's not that they weren't likeable.  It's that they were shallow.

Based on what?

What is there to Fenris beyond waiting for that slaver?  And why is he helping Hawke?  Why is he at Hawke's beck and call for years?

Revenge is a very strong reason. Very few need more reason than that. Why does someone help a person stranded on the road? Because they can. If he is Hawke's friend he chooses to help Hawke which is much like friends in real life. If not a friend Fenris sees Hawke as someone who can help him against Danarius and has powerful traveling companions.

Looks like a good place to hang around. Much like when Zeveran tells the warden you seem to be someone who would give the Crows reason to pause.

[Kavatica]

Filament wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

What is there to Fenris beyond waiting for that slaver?  And why is he helping Hawke?  Why is he at Hawke's beck and call for years?

He isn't, unless Hawke helped him to begin with. He likely respects Hawke at least as an ally in that regard, if not a friend.

I just played through with a fully rivaled Fenris playing an aggressive Hawke. In the last QB quest with Fen in Act 3, my Hawke said to him something along the lines of "We aren't friends. Why do you even care what I think?" and Fenris comes right out and says that he respects Hawke. So yes, he definitely does respect Hawke - even if they aren't friends.

Modifié par Kavatica, 15 mars 2012 - 06:25 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

Elhanan wrote...

Such as Sister Petrice and her active involvement against the Quanri.

Never mind that it's obvious that the sister is a bad scene waiting to happen in Act 1, and yet Hawke, no matter how ruthless and bloody you're playing the character, has no option to simply kill Petrice for her act of betrayal.  Without Petrice and her pet Templar to stoke the fires, maybe things could have been worked out peacefully with the Arishok. 

Of course, then you don't have the ending to Act 2 that the writers wanted, and we couldn't have that, huh?

[Killjoy Cutter]

Elhanan wrote...

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Here is another attempt at a fundamental statement that is, hopefully, in keeping with the title of this thread:

When one compares the sales figures for DA2 with those of its predecessor, it certainly looks like something went awry.

This just in: Some that played DAO discover they do not like FRPG's, or pasrts thereof....

Not everyone liked DAO for any number of reasons, and were not planning on getting this or any sequel; why I stopped watching Harry Potter after the first film.

What an... interesting way to interpret the sales numbers. 

it couldn't be that DA2 was a commercial flop on top of being an artistic failure, could it? 

[Das Tentakel]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

That may be because Varric and Aveline seem to be the most normal of the party members. I do think we as gamers do like to associate with normal. Anders, Fenris, Sebastin and to a degree Isabela seem more out of the norm.

Anders and Fenris are consumed with hate and a myopic view point. Sebastin seems blindly devoted to the Maker. Isabela while closer to normal has trust issues. Varric and Aveline would have Hawke's back.

Excellent points.

I've often thought these may be some of the reasons why so many people have said they see the DAO companions as having been somehow richer and deeper.  They seemed more subtle, and I feel that the fact that we could customize them made them seem more "normal" - customization not only in terms of appearance but also fewer restrictions on skills.

It also has to do with 'realism' (and thus suspension of disbelief), in the sense that extremists are generally rare, though not unknown, and that extremists themselves can be characterized as lacking realism and a sense of proportion. 
None of the more exteme companions are raving lunatics (well, Anders comes close sometimes), but it is relatively easy to consider them idiots from a behavioural point of view.

'Extreme' looks reinforce this impression somewhat in the case of Fenris and Isabella.
If Isabella had looked more like this (though with a more 'Spanish' look)


while still being sexually very active, she would have been way more believable. 
But I suppose somebody in Marketing preferred Awesome and Iconic secondary sexual characteristics:D

Point is: not everybody will be equally bothered by 'extreme' looks, but they run the risk of exaggerating the 'extremism' of characters that are already well outside the norm, to the point of turning them into (unsympathetic) caricatures.

[Elhanan]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Never mind that it's obvious that the sister is a bad scene waiting to happen in Act 1, and yet Hawke, no matter how ruthless and bloody you're playing the character, has no option to simply kill Petrice for her act of betrayal.  Without Petrice and her pet Templar to stoke the fires, maybe things could have been worked out peacefully with the Arishok. 

Of course, then you don't have the ending to Act 2 that the writers wanted, and we couldn't have that, huh?

You mean like this one? Rhetorical, as some with selective memories do forget that a few options are available:



No; one could not simply kill Sister Petrice. Why? Because in the narrative, she had other events that saw her oversight.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Elhanan wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Never mind that it's obvious that the sister is a bad scene waiting to happen in Act 1, and yet Hawke, no matter how ruthless and bloody you're playing the character, has no option to simply kill Petrice for her act of betrayal.  Without Petrice and her pet Templar to stoke the fires, maybe things could have been worked out peacefully with the Arishok. 

Of course, then you don't have the ending to Act 2 that the writers wanted, and we couldn't have that, huh?

You mean like this one? Rhetorical, as some with selective memories do forget that a few options are available:



No; one could not simply kill Sister Petrice. Why? Because in the narrative, she had other events that saw her oversight.

Screw the narrative, your character should not be presented with obvious opportunities and then transparently denied them for "storytelling reasons".  If you want your pet story to dominate all other considerations, go make a movie. 

As for your clip, you're conveniently forgetting everything that comes before that, as the Qunari slaughter their way through the city, seize the keep, kill the Viscount, etc.  There's nothing peaceful about that.

[Elhanan]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Screw the narrative, your character should not be presented with obvious opportunities and then transparently denied them for "storytelling reasons".  If you want your pet story to dominate all other considerations, go make a movie. 

As for your clip, you're conveniently forgetting everything that comes before that, as the Qunari slaughter their way through the city, seize the keep, kill the Viscount, etc.  There's nothing peaceful about that.

Again, options are not required of a RPG, but the former link does show that some are included.

And the scene above does depict a resolution where the actual battle between the Arishock, and perhaps the surviving Qunari takes place. No, it isn't peaceful; Isabela sure seem upset....

[Pasquale1234]

Elhanan wrote...

Again, options are not required of a RPG, but the former link does show that some are included.

And the scene above does depict a resolution where the actual battle between the Arishock, and perhaps the surviving Qunari takes place. No, it isn't peaceful; Isabela sure seem upset....

That scene comes after [spoilers], it does nothing to prevent it, which I believe was Killjoy's point.

[eroeru]

Das Tentakel wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

Das Tentakel wrote...

eroeru wrote...

It's certainly less simple and more problematic.

edit: I especially liked the fact he didn't know why he liked it - I feel for that as I also have no idea why anyone would like DA2. 
Besides, I enjoyed the change of pace (and style) that the post seemed to bring about (in contrast to previous discussions).

It's only when you do NOT like something but WANTED to love it that you start try to figure out why.
You can probably summarise a lot of the supplementary whining, including mine, as:

Why, oh why Bioware, hast thou forsaken me?

I remember that was the same feeling I got with DAO in comparison to Baldur's Gate. DAO was a spiritual successor to BG in that it was a pale imitation.

Luckily I never saw it as the successor to Baldur's Gate, which, like DA:O, I genuinely liked. But did not love.
It gave me the emotional distance to see it for what it was - the progeny of Neverwinter Nights (which I did not even like), and thus much closer to Neverwinter Nights II (which I did like, bugs and all) than Baldur's Gate.
I never considered the spiritual successor blathering as more than PR talk.

My 'emotional' beef with DA2 is probably the result of hoping to like it even more than DA:O, as well as seeing the potential in the game, its setup and some of the care and thought that went into it. Maybe a good comparison would be dating some nice girl's sister, having heard that she is truly great, and secretly hoping that the sparks would fly.
And ending up with an obviously schizophrenic girl with a nice figure but questionable hygiene.
But damn, can she occasionally be funny.

Man, this metaphor just went off the rails:?

Massive-like quote tree ftw.

Anyway, the spiritual successor thing is only important in that they seemed to go making the game with the same principles and ideals in mind that would trigger a Baldur's Gate fan for enjoyment - this was not the case with DA2

Luckily, I myself didn't hear about the spiritual successor PR excessively (as was DA2's PR) - I took Origins from a white sheet. But with DA2 I couldn't hold back my preconceptions simply because it isn't a white sheet - it rather strongly suggested bland copy-paste from ME and some very off-road ideas - like making the game more "edgy" (ugh) and in a sense "normal".