1306 réponses à ce sujet

[eroeru]

Oh, and, I'm happy to say I have no idea why I enjoyed Origins. (or it may simply be that I do not feel obliged to elaborately explain it like I do for the opposite for DA2 - as there isn't really a problem and the game felt as a whole - even if prompted by zillions of other players who have an opposing opinion... so that's part of the reason I got to relate with the more fundamental oblivious-like opinion).

Modifié par eroeru, 15 mars 2012 - 10:55 .

[Realmzmaster]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

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.

It would be a non-choice. Killing Petrice would not happen. Bioware could give you the illusion of choice and let you attack Petrice. Bioware would then simply take it away by having Ser Varnell and Petrice wipe the floor with your party and leave the party barely breathing. It would be a fight you are not intended to win. And given what happen with Ser Cauthrien ( at the Earl of Denerim estate) Bioware would make sure that Ser Varnell was unbeatable.  A tactic that is used in some jRPGs. In fact Ser Bernell at that point could do it himself and Petrice could slip away during the fight or she could wait and taunt Hawke as Hawke slips into unconciousness to wake up in some ditch.

Also if the party has Aveline in it I doubt she would allow Hawke to attack a templar or a sister. And no Aveline could not arrest Petrice. What would be the charge and any evidence is dead. Nothing linking Petrice to anything.

[Pasquale1234]

Realmzmaster wrote...

It would be a non-choice. Killing Petrice would not happen. Bioware could give you the illusion of choice and let you attack Petrice. Bioware would then simply take it away by having Ser Varnell and Petrice wipe the floor with your party and leave the party barely breathing. It would be a fight you are not intended to win. And given what happen with Ser Cauthrien ( at the Earl of Denerim estate) Bioware would make sure that Ser Varnell was unbeatable.  A tactic that is used in some jRPGs. In fact Ser Bernell at that point could do it himself and Petrice could slip away during the fight or she could wait and taunt Hawke as Hawke slips into unconciousness to wake up in some ditch.

Also if the party has Aveline in it I doubt she would allow Hawke to attack a templar or a sister. And no Aveline could not arrest Petrice. What would be the charge and any evidence is dead. Nothing linking Petrice to anything.

You can actually beat Ser Cauthrien, and avoid being arrested.

Regardless, I think Kiljoy's point is that it could give you a different path to resolving the whole Qunari situation, and perhaps a different path to becoming the Champion had BioWare chosen to implement it.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Realmzmaster wrote...

And given what happen with Ser Cauthrien ( at the Earl of Denerim estate) Bioware would make sure that Ser Varnell was unbeatable.

Why?  Killing Cauthrien didn't break the game.  The encounter didn't cheat - it was just extremely difficult - and the Warden was rewarded for defeating her by not being arrested.

I would argue that the Cauthrien example supports Pasquale's position, not yours.  The Cauthrien example is yet another reason why DAO was the better game.

[Realmzmaster]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

It would be a non-choice. Killing Petrice would not happen. Bioware could give you the illusion of choice and let you attack Petrice. Bioware would then simply take it away by having Ser Varnell and Petrice wipe the floor with your party and leave the party barely breathing. It would be a fight you are not intended to win. And given what happen with Ser Cauthrien ( at the Earl of Denerim estate) Bioware would make sure that Ser Varnell was unbeatable.  A tactic that is used in some jRPGs. In fact Ser Bernell at that point could do it himself and Petrice could slip away during the fight or she could wait and taunt Hawke as Hawke slips into unconciousness to wake up in some ditch.

Also if the party has Aveline in it I doubt she would allow Hawke to attack a templar or a sister. And no Aveline could not arrest Petrice. What would be the charge and any evidence is dead. Nothing linking Petrice to anything.

You can actually beat Ser Cauthrien, and avoid being arrested.

Regardless, I think Kiljoy's point is that it could give you a different path to resolving the whole Qunari situation, and perhaps a different path to becoming the Champion had BioWare chosen to implement it.

Exactly Ser Cauthrien can be beaten which is why I said Bioware would make Ser Varnell unbeatable to avoid that outcome. Also it still would not resolve the Quanari situation since the Arishok cannot leave with out the Tome which has not surfaced and would not until it was too late. So the outcome could still be the same. Hawke would have the satisfaction of killing Petrice, but still would not change the situation. The events are already in motion and there is very little that will stop it.

[TEWR]

there wouldn't need to be a battle with Varnell to explain why you can't kill them. All it would require is that Petrice actually blackmail Hawke into assisting her.

I proposed many months back that she should've said that agents of the Faithful -- her group of mad zealots -- were scattered throughout Lowtown and would report to the Chantry about Hawke should anything untowards happen to her.

And when you return, while Hawke was out completing the quest some of the Faithful came in to tell her that Hawke/Bethany is a mage, which would add another sense of why she can't be killed.

Boom. No need for some unrealistic combat to make her plot protected.

Now, in regards to giving a good reason why the quest must be completed, I think when I originally proposed my idea I had something that explained that as well. I can't remember. It may have even used the blackmail as part of why.

But at least what I've given here provides a good, thorough, and believable reason why Petrice and Varnell cannot be killed. The moment they are, the Templars would be on Hawke like a Qunari on cookies.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 15 mars 2012 - 11:40 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Exactly Ser Cauthrien can be beaten which is why I said Bioware would make Ser Varnell unbeatable to avoid that outcome.

I still don't see why that outcome would be something BioWare would break the game to avoid.

Also it still would not resolve the Quanari situation since the Arishok cannot leave with out the Tome which has not surfaced and would not until it was too late. So the outcome could still be the same. Hawke would have the satisfaction of killing Petrice, but still would not change the situation. The events are already in motion and there is very little that will stop it.

The satisfaction of killing Petrice is more than enough.

BioWare did this well in the BG: TotSC.  A wizard named Shandalar was not intended to be defeated (or even attacked), but if he was attacked he used some rule-breaking magic to flee.  But it took him 3 combat rounds to get away.  If you planned your attack well, Shandalar could be defeated.

Killing Petrice need not be impossible.

[Pasquale1234]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Exactly Ser Cauthrien can be beaten which is why I said Bioware would make Ser Varnell unbeatable to avoid that outcome. Also it still would not resolve the Quanari situation since the Arishok cannot leave with out the Tome which has not surfaced and would not until it was too late. So the outcome could still be the same. Hawke would have the satisfaction of killing Petrice, but still would not change the situation. The events are already in motion and there is very little that will stop it.

And again - BioWare could have implemented a different path to resolve the Qunari situation, had they made that choice.  They did not make that choice.

I could say more, but this is a non-spoiler forum.

[Realmzmaster]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

there wouldn't need to be a battle with Varnell to explain why you can't kill them. All it would require is that Petrice actually blackmail Hawke into assisting her.

I proposed many months back that she should've said that agents of the Faithful -- her group of mad zealots -- were scattered throughout Lowtown and would report to the Chantry about Hawke should anything untowards happen to her.

And when you return, while Hawke was out completing the quest some of the Faithful came in to tell her that Hawke/Bethany is a mage, which would add another sense of why she can't be killed.

Boom. No need for some unrealistic combat to make her plot protected.

Now, in regards to giving a good reason why the quest must be completed, I think when I originally proposed my idea I had something that explained that as well. I can't remember. It may have even used the blackmail as part of why.

But at least what I've given here provides a good, thorough, and believable reason why Petrice and Varnell cannot be killed. The moment they are, the Templars would be on Hawke like a Qunari on cookies.

I liked your idea then and I like it now, but some forum mates still wanted the option of attacking Petrice and Varnell which would lead to combat. Hence you can create an unwinnable fight for that option.

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 16 mars 2012 - 12:26 .

[TEWR]

I liked your idea then and I like it now, but some forum mates still wanted the option of attacking Petrice and Varnell which would lead to combat. Hence you can create an unwinnable fight for that option.

Yea, but that strains credulity as the game is basically saying then that one Templar is enough to take down a party of four. And that creates an inconsistency when that same party of four can defeat Abominations and demons -- ignoring the already large inconsistency that exists because Abominations are purely drunken brawlers gameplay wise, which directly contradicts what's stated lorewise.

Far better would be for the option to attack her to result in say... a sleeping gas trap/bomb that knocks the party out. Then Petrice and Varnell escape in a tactically efficient -- if somewhat cheap -- way while the player still tried to kill them.

Assuming the option to attack was even in the game at all.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 16 mars 2012 - 01:36 .

[Lone hero]

Just gonna say outright... i absolutely despised DA2 and i generally represent my opinion with an obscene amount of animosity i will attempt to refrain from doing so now....The Art style of DA2 was ok but bland, and it didn't help that so many of the same caves and buildings were reused, the story while ok at times did not feel interconnected into the whole, Templar-Mage, story it was originally trying to go for, while hawke was an ok Main character but his supporting companions, (aside from anders he may want to bone my Male hawke for some reason but he's still cool to get drinks with , and also varrik), as well the changes in chracater design, specifically the elves (they felt very odd and not very... elfy....? looking they just didn't feel right with the redesign ok....), as well while i disliked the hack and slash combat mage and Rogue were a hell of a lot of fun. Now i say all this in the most calm i have ever used to describe DA2, and this is from a fan of Dragon age origins who has spent somewhere over 1100 hours who most of the time pl,ayed the exact same character.

[Das Tentakel]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

Exactly Ser Cauthrien can be beaten which is why I said Bioware would make Ser Varnell unbeatable to avoid that outcome. Also it still would not resolve the Quanari situation since the Arishok cannot leave with out the Tome which has not surfaced and would not until it was too late. So the outcome could still be the same. Hawke would have the satisfaction of killing Petrice, but still would not change the situation. The events are already in motion and there is very little that will stop it.

And again - BioWare could have implemented a different path to resolve the Qunari situation, had they made that choice.  They did not make that choice.

I could say more, but this is a non-spoiler forum.

I don't think that was ever the point with the Petrice-related quests. Their purpose is not letting Hawke resolve something (actually making a difference), but they serve as a vehicle for narrative exposition regarding the Qunari and the Chantry. Typically, a quest (or in an pen & paper RPG campaign a particular adventure) would do both - letting the player(s) accomplish something and also provide some exposition. Not so here. You still get a Pavlovian 'reward' in terms of XP/money/items, but those are no replacement for the feeling of having accomplished something tangible.

Modifié par Das Tentakel, 16 mars 2012 - 07:25 .

[Pasquale1234]

Das Tentakel wrote...

I don't think that was ever the point with the Petrice-related quests. Their purpose is not letting Hawke resolve something (actually making a difference), but they serve as a vehicle for narrative exposition regarding the Qunari and the Chantry. Typically, a quest (or in an pen & paper RPG campaign a particular adventure) would do both - letting the player(s) accomplish something and also provide some exposition. Not so here. You still get a Pavlovian 'reward' in terms of XP/money/items, but those are no replacement for the feeling of having accomplished something tangible.

I agree.  The storyline with Petrice was an integral part of the narrative.

This discussion started with me pointing out that the link someone posted was not really a response to someone else's post, and had been misunderstood.  My response was (I think) misunderstood, and it went from there.  I won't do that again....

[Elhanan]

A problem with allowing the Players to kill key characters is the tale may stop in it's tracks. If one may kill Petrice, then others may wish similar options to kill the Arishock, Elthina, the Viscount, Meredith, etc; any of which are major characters for latter roles in the story. Plus, setting some characters to Immortal also creates a fuss, even if it is done to prevent bugs.

And inj the end, someone always complains, so I opt for the choice with the intended story.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Das Tentakel wrote...

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

Exactly Ser Cauthrien can be beaten which is why I said Bioware would make Ser Varnell unbeatable to avoid that outcome. Also it still would not resolve the Quanari situation since the Arishok cannot leave with out the Tome which has not surfaced and would not until it was too late. So the outcome could still be the same. Hawke would have the satisfaction of killing Petrice, but still would not change the situation. The events are already in motion and there is very little that will stop it.

And again - BioWare could have implemented a different path to resolve the Qunari situation, had they made that choice.  They did not make that choice.

I could say more, but this is a non-spoiler forum.

I don't think that was ever the point with the Petrice-related quests. Their purpose is not letting Hawke resolve something (actually making a difference), but they serve as a vehicle for narrative exposition regarding the Qunari and the Chantry. Typically, a quest (or in an pen & paper RPG campaign a particular adventure) would do both - letting the player(s) accomplish something and also provide some exposition. Not so here. You still get a Pavlovian 'reward' in terms of XP/money/items, but those are no replacement for the feeling of having accomplished something tangible.

As I said before, if someone's main concerrn is narrative exposition, then video games are not the medium they should be concentrating on.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Elhanan wrote...

A problem with allowing the Players to kill key characters is the tale may stop in it's tracks. If one may kill Petrice, then others may wish similar options to kill the Arishock, Elthina, the Viscount, Meredith, etc; any of which are major characters for latter roles in the story. Plus, setting some characters to Immortal also creates a fuss, even if it is done to prevent bugs.

And inj the end, someone always complains, so I opt for the choice with the intended story.

Then have Petrice gone already when Hawke returns, and never encountered again outside the Chantry. 

What you don't do is create situations in which a course of action should obviously be available, and then simply deny that option by fiat. 

Once you put Petrice in that room, protected by a single average Templar, then not allowing Hawke to kill her is simply putting your own authorial agenda ahead of the quality of the game as a game.

Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 16 mars 2012 - 01:42 .

[cljqnsnyc]

CrustyBot wrote...

No. It is generally accepted however, that Dragon Age 2 is taking BioWare in an innovative direction and that those who dislike it are just people who can't handle change or technological progress.

Either this guy is joking or he's been smoking some REALLY STRONG STUFF!

I haven't been in this particular forum for quite some time now..  Just thought I'd peak in a year after the smoke has cleared just to see how things look after time has passed...to find that some things never change.

Not to beat a dead and tired horse but history has already spoken on DA2. If you disagree that what it has to say on the subject is far from positive, see how many developers..even Bioware itself...follows the model of DA2.

Seems to me it's now infamously part of the rulebook on what NOT to do when following up a succesful new game with a brand new fanbase.

[Killjoy Cutter]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I liked your idea then and I like it now, but some forum mates still wanted the option of attacking Petrice and Varnell which would lead to combat. Hence you can create an unwinnable fight for that option.

Yea, but that strains credulity as the game is basically saying then that one Templar is enough to take down a party of four. And that creates an inconsistency when that same party of four can defeat Abominations and demons -- ignoring the already large inconsistency that exists because Abominations are purely drunken brawlers gameplay wise, which directly contradicts what's stated lorewise.

Far better would be for the option to attack her to result in say... a sleeping gas trap/bomb that knocks the party out. Then Petrice and Varnell escape in a tactically efficient -- if somewhat cheap -- way while the player still tried to kill them.

Assuming the option to attack was even in the game at all.

Auto-defeats and cutscene defeats are aggravating, and lazy game design.  There should never be an encounter that the character automatically loses. 

If you're going to put an NPC in a situation where they might be attacked, you have to be willing to lose them.

If you're not willing to lose them, never leave them exposed to attack. 

[Killjoy Cutter]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

And given what happen with Ser Cauthrien ( at the Earl of Denerim estate) Bioware would make sure that Ser Varnell was unbeatable.

Why?  Killing Cauthrien didn't break the game.  The encounter didn't cheat - it was just extremely difficult - and the Warden was rewarded for defeating her by not being arrested.

I would argue that the Cauthrien example supports Pasquale's position, not yours.  The Cauthrien example is yet another reason why DAO was the better game.

Exactly. 

I retreated into the hallway and used trapping spells, AoE spells, and such to wipe out all the guards, while my tank kept Cauthrien busy with the help of some heals and potions. 

[In Exile]

Elhanan wrote...

A problem with allowing the Players to kill key characters is the tale may stop in it's tracks. If one may kill Petrice, then others may wish similar options to kill the Arishock, Elthina, the Viscount, Meredith, etc; any of which are major characters for latter roles in the story. Plus, setting some characters to Immortal also creates a fuss, even if it is done to prevent bugs.

And inj the end, someone always complains, so I opt for the choice with the intended story.

There's a difference, though, between wanting to kill NPCs for the sake of killing NPCs, and wanting to kill NPCs that just actively tried to kill you. Petrice tried to murder you. She should be open to killing.

If Bioware wanted to press the inevitability of things, they could have had a different zealout follow through on Petrice's plan in virtue of Hawke killing her (to get revenge).

[Killjoy Cutter]

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.

They stand out for not being caricatures.  Huh.

[Killjoy Cutter]

In Exile wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

A problem with allowing the Players to kill key characters is the tale may stop in it's tracks. If one may kill Petrice, then others may wish similar options to kill the Arishock, Elthina, the Viscount, Meredith, etc; any of which are major characters for latter roles in the story. Plus, setting some characters to Immortal also creates a fuss, even if it is done to prevent bugs.

And inj the end, someone always complains, so I opt for the choice with the intended story.

There's a difference, though, between wanting to kill NPCs for the sake of killing NPCs, and wanting to kill NPCs that just actively tried to kill you. Petrice tried to murder you. She should be open to killing.

If Bioware wanted to press the inevitability of things, they could have had a different zealout follow through on Petrice's plan in virtue of Hawke killing her (to get revenge).

Yeap.  Petrice tries to get Hawke and companions killed for her own petty agenda, and Hawke is forced, through authorial fiat, to allow her to walk away.  It's aggravating and rediculous.

[Killjoy Cutter]

cljqnsnyc wrote...

CrustyBot wrote...

No. It is generally accepted however, that Dragon Age 2 is taking BioWare in an innovative direction and that those who dislike it are just people who can't handle change or technological progress.

Either this guy is joking or he's been smoking some REALLY STRONG STUFF!

I haven't been in this particular forum for quite some time now..  Just thought I'd peak in a year after the smoke has cleared just to see how things look after time has passed...to find that some things never change.

Not to beat a dead and tired horse but history has already spoken on DA2. If you disagree that what it has to say on the subject is far from positive, see how many developers..even Bioware itself...follows the model of DA2.

Seems to me it's now infamously part of the rulebook on what NOT to do when following up a succesful new game with a brand new fanbase.

You don't use a sequel to go after a new fanbase by crapping on everything that made the fanbase of the original like it. 

[Das Tentakel]

Elhanan wrote...

A problem with allowing the Players to kill key characters is the tale may stop in it's tracks. If one may kill Petrice, then others may wish similar options to kill the Arishock, Elthina, the Viscount, Meredith, etc; any of which are major characters for latter roles in the story. Plus, setting some characters to Immortal also creates a fuss, even if it is done to prevent bugs.

And inj the end, someone always complains, so I opt for the choice with the intended story.

It's not a question of being able to kill key NPC's, it's a question of writing the quests in a way that there is no credible opportunity plus the necessary motivation to kill those characters.
Almost everybody understands that killing, say, the Duke of Erehwon for no obvious reason, while he is surrounded by his entire army and has done nothing to openly provoke you, is a bad idea and will probably result in the player character's death. Or that it is downright impossible because 'combat mode' simply isn't available, but credible because only an idiot would attack the Duke.

It becomes a different story when you DO have sufficient motive ('the Duke killed my sister') and it makes narrative sense ('he's alone with just two bodyguards') , and you can't attack or kill such a character. Then it becomes immersion- and player agency-breaking.

In the case of the Petrice-related quests, the wanted exposition, plus some scenes the writers thought would be really cool, are forced upon the player without allowing some meaningful choices. It is perfectly conceivable, and in my DM's mind not even that terribly hard, to design these quests in a way that you get all three of them: Exposition, Cool Cut Scenes, and player agency / meaningful choices. The REAL question in such situations is whether the devs have the ability (skills, technical capabilities, time) and the willingness to do so.

Modifié par Das Tentakel, 16 mars 2012 - 02:29 .

[Das Tentakel]

Drat, double post:pinched:

Modifié par Das Tentakel, 16 mars 2012 - 02:27 .