485 réponses à ce sujet

[bEVEsthda]

Sometimes it's a source of frustration that developers don't listen as you'd want them.

Sometimes it's a source of comfort.

[the_one_54321]

Filament wrote...
The issues talked about in the story forum are a lot more specific and not necessarily representative of a "trend," but of an oversight, like John mentioned in the example about Grace. I take it what you're talking about are things like voiced protagonist, customization options, etc, which are not generally discussed in that forum much...

Well, what I was talking about was the presentation of Hawke's personality, which was then taken in the direction of the effect of the VA. It's very broad. But specific examples always come up in every discussion. And then usually the specific examples take over the discussion.

[TEWR]

Filament wrote...

I would say they drive both sides' arguments forward. To mages (the ones revolting now, not the ones "insane" themselves), it's: look what they do to us. To templars, it's: see, they are dangerous.

They didn't just make the mages insane to artificially make the templars more like-able.

There is truth to that, but ultimately when only one path makes sense and the other doesn't, it sure as hell seems like they went out of their way to make one path the right choice and the other the wrong choice.

But, I hadn't considered what you stated before. While I don't think that perspective was appropriate for DAII in my mind, it certainly is a valid one.

Still, I would argue that the protagonist needs to feel some sense that what he is fighting for is the right path, without arbitrary storyline necessities dictating otherwise and trashing the perception of certain characters.

Like come the endgame for one person in particular, when what limited interaction you have with said person doesn't give off the air that the endgame would seem to have you believe.

Now of course, one's actions shouldn't condemn hundreds of others and that is my favored argument, but it does seem to try and send such a message.

Side note: Also, gameplay shouldn't have more importance over story and more specifically choices, IMO.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 30 avril 2012 - 08:34 .

[Dave of Canada]

My Anti-Qunari Pro-Templar Aggressive Hawke who failed to stop the Qunari rising or mages from rebelling and failed to save everybody he loved certainly didn't feel like a god-among-mortals.

Tallis even brainwashed him to prevent him from being in-character at the end of MOTA.

Edit: Is it wrong to worry that I won't be able to be pro-Templar?

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 30 avril 2012 - 08:45 .

[BubbleDncr]

John Epler wrote...

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

John Epler wrote...
As for Hawke, would it suffice if I said we're aware of the problem regarding Hawke being proactive?

 

John Epler wrote... 
 One thing we're focusing on going forward, though, is always providing a good, clear motivation as to the player's actions, and then avoiding putting them in situations where simply being active would solve a whole lot of problems down the road - if I could go back and redo it, I would've done the entire Grace scene differently to explain why you don't just shoot her in the face with a bow. The 'captured' scene in Mark of the Assassin was a direct response to this - 'why don't you just fight your way out?' 'Well, there are a lot of guards.' 'Okay, but I can kill a lot of guards.' 'Okay, it's a -lot- a lot of guards.'

Thank you John. Now I think I can smile already. 

Sci-fi/contemporary have it a lot easier.

'Why don't you just kill them?'

'They're talking with you over a loudspeaker, and the room you're in is bulletproof/rapidly filling with gas.'

'Well played.'

I dunno - there were a fair amount of cutscenes in ME3 where Shepard could have easily killed that one bad guy but instead did nothing (I would name specifics but alas, no spoilers here). But I was literally yalling at the screen for Shepard to do something.

Modifié par BubbleDncr, 30 avril 2012 - 08:49 .

[TEWR]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Edit: Is it wrong to worry that I won't be able to be pro-Templar?

You can be pro-Ferelden instead, once we get our epic Loghain cameo.

[Dakota Strider]

A way to compare the Warden and the Champion, is on the opponents they faced;

And they say that you're judged by the strength of your enemies... James Bond, Quantum of Solace.

The Warden had the Arch demon and Loghain throughout the entire saga.  And numerous other antagonists through different chapters, of lesser importance.

The Champion had the Arishok  (done after chapter 2), and Meredith (who was really not seen as the enemy, until the very end of chapter 2, or into chapter 3). 

It is not the Champion's fault, that the most important enemies that he/she had to overcome in Kirkwall, really do not compare in stature to the enemies that the Warden prevailed against in Ferelden.   But, it is inevitable that both will be compared to the strength and legend of their enemies.   Does not make the Champion a lesser hero, at least in potential.  But the Warden was tested against far stronger foes, in strength and cunning, that had far more resources.  So, the perception that the Warden was more heroic/god-like is inevitable.  That is true, even if the Champion is possibly a "stronger" character, if the two were to face off against each other.

Modifié par Dakota Strider, 30 avril 2012 - 09:20 .

[Deviija]

I think the discussion drifted from the main talking point. I don't think this thread was meant as 'Warden vs. Hawke - Compare/Contrast: A Case Of Egoism' but more about the concept of a hero not being the messianic superhero of the gameworld. To the point where even the PC is cracking wise about how she is the only one that can sort out everyone's daily problems, big and small.

We've been talking about potential causes of the issue(s)... But what would be a better choice-driven way to portray a character that doesn't fall prey to these RPG trappings (it really isn't *just* a Hawke/Warden thing or even a BioWare-specific thing)? Is it a matter of tone, or is it a matter of activity/action/resolution of plot points -- or both? Or perhaps having certain scenes where the character does fail, or can't overcome certain antagonists/obstacles, or...?

[the_one_54321]

Deviija wrote...
I think the discussion drifted from the main talking point. I don't think this thread was meant as 'Warden vs. Hawke - Compare/Contrast: A Case Of Egoism' but more about the concept of a hero not being the messianic superhero of the gameworld. To the point where even the PC is cracking wise about how she is the only one that can sort out everyone's daily problems, big and small.

We've been talking about potential causes of the issue(s)... But what would be a better choice-driven way to portray a character that doesn't fall prey to these RPG trappings (it really isn't *just* a Hawke/Warden thing or even a BioWare-specific thing)? Is it a matter of tone, or is it a matter of activity/action/resolution of plot points -- or both? Or perhaps having certain scenes where the character does fail, or can't overcome certain antagonists/obstacles, or...?

Yes. Thank you for identifying the topic better than I could.

[TEWR]

Deviija wrote...

We've been talking about potential causes of the issue(s)... But what would be a better choice-driven way to portray a character that doesn't fall prey to these RPG trappings (it really isn't *just* a Hawke/Warden thing or even a BioWare-specific thing)? Is it a matter of tone, or is it a matter of activity/action/resolution of plot points -- or both? Or perhaps having certain scenes where the character does fail, or can't overcome certain antagonists/obstacles, or...?

I'd say all.

Proactivity, reactivity, choice, consequence, behavior, control over the voiced PC, etc.

All of them help to determine who the hero should be. Someone that can handle things on his own, has enough sense to know when something should be done, knows what to do, knows when he has to sacrifice something to gain something, and is given valid reasons why certain courses of action aren't able to be determined.

It really seems to be down to player agency, primarily. But just as much down to how well constructed the story is.

But then you've got those damnable zots issues.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 30 avril 2012 - 09:39 .

[Dakota Strider]

Also, the Warden and his team seem to be more heroic for me, is not just the enemies they defeated, but they did it with more "normal" weapons and magic. The Champion and his companions, with their ""upgraded"" items and magic, had their legend reduced because it just did not seem as hard for them to win.

Here is an example: A) Hunter A brags "I just killed that grizzly bear from a hundred paces with an elephant gun. Hunter B replies, "I killed a grizzly bear too, all I had was my pocket knife."

Now, some people would gladly go hunting with elephant guns and tanks, and be satisfied. But, many would prefer using weapons that make the accomplishment, much more of a challenge. The degree of difficulty, in many things, influences how you feel about the experience. And to me, the Warden had by far, more accomplishments that were more challenging, than the Champion's.

Modifié par Dakota Strider, 30 avril 2012 - 09:45 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

John Epler wrote...

I mean, aside from the lack of VO, you could play the Warden as every bit as much a cocky jerk as Hawke. Perhaps it's the lack of voiced lines that give people the feeling that there's a significant difference?

The lack of voiced lines is the source of the significant difference.

In DA2, Hawke will always deliver any given line a certain way.  In DAO, that's not the case.  That's the difference.

[Cantina]

I always play a diplomatic/helpful Hawke. My only issue is when it comes time for combat she is so serious about it. I hate it when she yells, “Follow my lead!” Uh if I was a warrior, this line would make sense, but being a mage, please do not follow me straight into that Revenant were he‘d no doubt **** smack me into next Tuesday for getting too close.

I personally did not care for Act 1 in Dragon Age 2. While I was running around helping people at the same time, too I felt selfish for taking their money. Being a role player, I would have preferred the option like in Origins to tell these people to keep their money or items. It felt so forced, pretty much almost every quest was a set-up for Act 2 quests and Act 2 quests were a setup for Act 3 quests.

Therefore, my character is running around, trying to collect money, to go on an expedition to setup the events for later in the game and reclaim her mansion. Honestly, I could care less about reclaiming my family’s mansion and could care less about the Deep Roads expedition. Sides even when you get down there, if you bring a certain companion with you, they give you a warning about that item. Uh, so why would we still take it if it is not good? I see my Hawke, smashing the damn thing and moving on. Again, I am forced to do something just to make the plot for the end of the game. Act 2 was better, but
I felt it was rather short compared to Act 1 and Act 3 was even shorter.


For me though speaking to Anders in Act 1 and finding out about how bad the situation for mages was in Kirkwall was enough reason for my Hawke to find a reason to fight. She then used her title as Champion to help even further. However, I never felt my Hawke had any real power, compared to let us say Awakening were my Warden had situations to use that power.


In Origins, my Warden seemed to be on the direct path to save the world from the Blight. Were as in Dragon Age 2, it felt disjointed and the quests you were doing were simply there because no matter your choices the ending was the same. While my Hawke had a different reason to fight then the Warden, the problem was the reason was constantly changing unlike the Warden, which to me makes it a bit more difficult to figure out what Hawke’s purpose is other than to be plot device.

[Cigne]

harkness72 wrote...

I want to start off feeling like a grunt, someone who hasn't got two coins to rub together and is pretty much an amateur, untested in combat.

At the end of the game however, I want to feel like I've earned the reputation of a God-amongst mortals.

I feel this was done pretty well with the Warden, especially when you came from humble roots such as the City Elf. I think it could have been done with Hawke, if only they had been more important and more proactive.

I enjoy that type of character progression, too.

But I recall posts from players wanting something different after DAO; ongoing family that are part of the story, a world that doesn't shape itself around the protagonist, etc.

I give Bioware credit for trying something different. That Hawke can come across as an ineffectual 'tool' in some playthroughs is an issue with the execution, not the concept.

I think the Warden is more of a traditional hero of destiny than Hawke, who (im my first playthrough) came across as the wrong person in the wrong place type.

[Deano1981]

After giving this some thought I have come to the conclusion Bioware would have done a lot better had they switched DAO and DA2 around. Comparing the size of the game and the calibre of the enemies for each PC character, it would have the feel that it had all been scaled up greater expanse of land, greater threat.

In biowares defense however, how long do we expect they could keep this up? How long could they cater to our "I want something new" point of view?

Rags to Riches - Done to death
Fall from Grace - Almost done as much, Epitome of goodness turns evil (in my experience it was someone the player was meant to hold in high regard, never the player themself)
PC god amongst Men - Games of old used this, SOM was such a game, KIDS were able to take down both fantastic creatures and trained soldiers.
Good boy/girl = plastic - The typical do good anywhere and everywhere you can, saving damsels in distress and rescuing kittens from trees.
My gaming repotoire is rather limited but there doesnt seem a lot else that would ensnare the players interest.

What I have yet to see however is the PC becoming the bad guy in the end and having to fight those he travelled with, Warcraft 3 touched on this when you started with Arthas' story, it progressed to the point where he became the bad guy.

Although the games imo have lacked the quality I have come to expect after DAO, and wonder if they are even trying, at the same time I think about how long they could still keep impressing us what could they possibly come up with?

[Deano1981]

after writing that post I just had this vision of my first PC facing off against my 2nd PC as a last "Boss Fight" I like the way my mind works at times.

[brushyourteeth]

I for one, would be interested in hearing what kind of character you actually would like to play, the_one_54321. And specifically, not just generally.

Because Hawke was obviously a disappointment to you, but I can't agree until I know what you're talking about. Playing DAIII as a random schmuck who never accomplishes much and leaves little impression on the world simply doesn't interest me. If I wanted to do that I'd just collect houses and lovers in Fable 2 or 3 and never complete any quests.

[the_one_54321]

The kind of character that I always play in DA:O. It's not about limiting capability, but allowing humility.

[Direwolf0294]

The OP 's post confuses me a bit. DA is an RPG and BioWare gave people the option of playing a sarcastic, sort of up themselves character who makes light of serious situations, which in my opinion was a great move because that's the sort of character you almost never get to see in games. If you didn't want your character to be like that then just pick different options.

It's like complaining your character killed an NPC after you selected the option to kill the NPC .

As fo Hawke being a fan service hero I sort of felt the opposite. Playing Hawke I never really felt like a hero at all, I felt like some ordinary chump with no special skills who was trying to do right but no matter how much effort she put in things just never went the right way.

[Sidney]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

The Warden is the only surviving member of a super order who saves 'the world' from an ancient, mindless evil. You can sacrifice yourself, or you can have sex with a woman, or convince someone else to have sex with her, or sacrifice a companion.

Hawke is a refugee who rose to prominence in a city but was ultimately a pawn of history.

The first is a massive ego stroke on two legs. The second is a regular character.

I 100% agree with this, and it's not as if the Warden is Ms. Humility by default - just like Hawke isn't a jerk by default. It depends on how you play your characters and which dialogue choices you make. Like others in this thread have said, you can just as easily pick the diplomatic options with Hawke and come across as being more humble.

Exactly - notable that the dude hwo hasn't played the game is ripping it. My Warden was a bigger jerk than my Hawke (hateful anrgy bitter elven mage - the real bottom of the oppressed by society foodchain seemed to fit).

[Sidney]

Cigne wrote...


I give Bioware credit for trying something different. That Hawke can come across as an ineffectual 'tool' in some playthroughs is an issue with the execution, not the concept.

I think the Warden is more of a traditional hero of destiny than Hawke, who (im my first playthrough) came across as the wrong person in the wrong place type.

The Warden is your standard blaring trumpets "I'm here to save the world!!!!!" character. Hawke is by contrast a much more human character who struggles to do what he can (and it is in that struggle he defined who he is) but in the end the whole world doesn't revolve around him and ONLY him doing things. That concept and execution remains of one my favorite parts of DA2. No, Hawke can't save everyone and sadly people want/expect that. For all the hot air a lot of the ME3 ending hate is about not being able to save the relays, just blow up the reapers and run off to the beach with your LI. Bioware actually overestimated their fanbases willingness to tolerate something "different" in those cases and could have saved a lot of grief by just having the stock standard happy ending.