634 réponses à ce sujet

[Persephone]

slimgrin wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

I suspect that in the eyes of say, a die-hard  Witcher 2 fan, anything that isn't "politics" is, therefore, childish BS? Am I getting close?

I don't mean this disparragingly. Political intrigue, when done right (and TW2 does it better than any RPG I've ever played) IS terrific. Mature. Thought provoking. All those things. But High fantasy isn't any less mature simply because it concerns itself with supernatural things, like magic, dragons, dwarves and  hero squads instead of the politics of men.

We rarely agree on anything, but I completely agree with this.

Some of the world's greatest writing had little to no politics in it.

Bronte, Austen, du Maurier, Pushkin....

And when it comes to political intrigue, Tolstoi and Marlowe as well as Shakespeare reduce the Witcher Series to a nice, if heavy handed and juvenile effort. Its biggest problem being the utter lack continuity and radical switches in characters. A direct comparison? Philippa Eilhart, the series' greatest schemer on the female front has nothing to hold up against the likes of Lady Macbeth, Hamlet's scheming, murderous mother or even Anne Boleyn. Triss pales compared to Natasha or even Ophelia. And Radovid, though competent and interesting, is just....ok...compared to Henry V, the refreshingly pragmatic Henry VII. Or Tolstoi's portrayal of his hero in the deliciously complex "War And Peace", Pierre, it reduces Geralt of Rivia's whole story to a cliche riddled fairy tale. And give me a realistic, multi-faceted character like Anna Karenina over any of the caricatures of "bad" girls in BOTH DAO and TW1&2.

I LOVE the Witcher series. But the way it's put on a pedestal is getting ridiculous.

Lord, now this is a pointless excercise. Please don't construct artisitc hierarchies. No one is trying to place the Witcher above Faust. 

@Yrkoon. You should read Tom Bissel's article on TW2. It's as snarky and as trite as your take is. But then he only played the game for 6 hrs.

Having read all the literature above is why I'm not on board with the rampant TW2 worship. All I am saying. Neither the books nor the games are masterpieces of plot (The plot id typical RPG fanfare with some intrigue to spice it up.) or characterization. (That was particularly lacking. The protagonist had amnesia, to the point of forgetting people from the previous game.... and the few interesting folks were victims of cliched "bad boy/gal" scenes aka the reduction of Dethmold to an effeminate tool...and Radovid watching Philippa being tortured like a sociopath...) 

[slimgrin]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Notice the bolded part.

Helps to read carefully.

If you thought anything in that definition supported your argument, you bolded the wrong part.

Zjarcal wrote...

Thank you for letting us know it's fine to enjoy it, and for so properly enlightening us as to what is and what isn't mature.

KoP has the most refined tastes on the forum.  You can tell because Xanatos is his avatar.  Only the best people appreciate Xanatos.

Alright. Yeah, you're annoyed, but cut the personal attacks.

[Lenimph]

You cannot just pick a grape from the word vine and use it as substantial evidence for your argument but since we're going there. 

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Notice the bolded part.

Helps to read carefully.

k thnx bai

[Persephone]

Zjarcal wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Indeed.

A story of the Good vs the faceless mindless big bad Evil that wants to destroy the world, having no intelligence, complexity and nuance in its very design, with simplistic bipolar dichotomies, stripping the story of its humanity replacing them with motivationless monsters in lieu of a conflict actually being developped, is immature.

It's fine to enjoy immaturity.

Thank you for letting us know it's fine to enjoy it, and for so properly enlightening us as to what is and what isn't mature.

Isn't it though?

[upsettingshorts]

slimgrin wrote...

Alright. Yeah, you're annoyed, but cut the personal attacks.

There is no other logical explanation for his rhetorical style on display in this thread.

It is not a personal criticism, but a criticism of his argument.  If KoP is the arbiter of what constitutes a "mature" story, then his position makes sense.

If he's not - and he's not - then it's nothing but hot air attempting to lift a subjective preference into the rarified atmosphere of Truth.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 12 mai 2012 - 09:02 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Lenimph wrote...

You cannot just pick a grape from the word vine and use it as substantial evidence for your argument but since we're going there. 

I didn't think it was necessary for me to write a sentence to explain why I bolded that word. But fine. Maturity is being developped of mind. When it comes to story, it's a story that is intellectually developped, in other words, complex,  thoughtful, nuanced....etc. 

And no, those who enjoy games that do not require much thinking to like are not idiots.

@ Slimgrin.
shorts's been obsessed with me for quite some time, so I wouldn't bother. I just ignore it.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 12 mai 2012 - 09:05 .

[slimgrin]

Persephone wrote...


Having read all the literature above is why I'm not on board with the rampant TW2 worship. All I am saying. Neither the books nor the games are masterpieces of plot (The plot id typical RPG fanfare with some intrigue to spice it up.) or characterization. (That was particularly lacking. The protagonist had amnesia, to the point of forgetting people from the previous game.... and the few interesting folks were victims of cliched "bad boy/gal" scenes aka the reduction of Dethmold to an effeminate tool...and Radovid watching Philippa being tortured like a sociopath...) 

And Michelangelo totally pwns Jim lee at figure drawing... I've read some fairly heavy literature too. The Odyssey and Beowulf are two of my favorite stories. I enjoy Kafka, Wells, etc. 

But assigning an order to mediums of artisitic expression simply is not constructive. In fact, it's a quick way to being close minded about other art forms. So in the context of gaming, for me TW represent a high point. Hell, even when the series utilizes cliche, it either turns it on its head or just plain does it well. Like the Amnesia.

Modifié par slimgrin, 12 mai 2012 - 09:34 .

[Mr.House]

We are just to immature to understand KoPs artistic integrity guys.

[Chromie]

slimgrin wrote...
 even when the series utilizes cliche, it either turns it on its head or just plain does it well. Like the Amnesia.

CDPR did managed to own the cliche. Many times have I played games with amnesiac protagonist and didn't bother to build on it. 

[KnightofPhoenix]

Mr.House wrote...

We are just to immature to understand KoPs artistic integrity guys.

It would have been a good one if that is remotely what I said or implied.

[upsettingshorts]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

@ Slimgrin.
shorts's been obsessed with me for quite some time, so I wouldn't bother. I just ignore it.

If by "obsessed with" you mean "amused by" and "has parodied" then sure.

Only you would think the reason I'm challenging you in this thread is because you're you.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 12 mai 2012 - 09:11 .

[Mr.House]

Skelter192 wrote...

slimgrin wrote...
 even when the series utilizes cliche, it either turns it on its head or just plain does it well. Like the Amnesia.

CDPR did managed to own the cliche. Many times have I played games with amnesiac protagonist and didn't bother to build on it. 

Revan was done better imo.

[Costin_Razvan]

It's nice to see the bio drones out here.

 
Revan was done better imo. 

In terms of just the amnesia plot? Maybe, but for TW games it was never a main plot. Whereas in KOTOR Revan's amnesia was.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 12 mai 2012 - 09:52 .

[Dave of Canada]

Revan was great until he was absolutely butchered in SWTOR.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 12 mai 2012 - 09:10 .

[Maria Caliban]

Megaton_Hope wrote...

One could consider the Blight (which is to say the Archdemon) an antagonist. Either the Wardens or the Blight will succeed in achieving their goals.

The Archdemon is an antagonist. If you wanted to be picky, the Blight is an antagonistic force, but presumably if someone knows the term 'antagonistic force' they know that antagonist is often used instead of it.

An inert lump of rock is not an antagonist. A rock does not have goals. It is a rock. Projecting goals onto a rock is not very productive.

This is where we disagree. In fiction, object and events can easily require human characteristics. If I have heroes battling against a storm, I'll probably characterize the storm as menacing, violent, and capricious.

Yes, a rock that's just sitting there is unlikely to be perceived as anything more than an object, but a giant asteroid that's going to slam into the Earth and kill everyone will likely be anthomorphized to some extent.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Revan was great until he was absolutely butchered in KOTOR.

Yea.

Now, he wants to kill 97.6% of Sith, to stop the Emperor, who mind influenced him to do everything he did. But then Revan mind influence the Emepror to do everything he did.

And then it turns out that the Emperor just wants to kill everything in the galaxy, for fear of being killed.

I can't even imagine someone with a straight face telling me this is mature.

[Mr.House]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Revan was great until he was absolutely butchered in KOTOR.

I didn't feel he was butchered at all, I liek where they are gonig with him. A force user has been both Jedi and Sith, has lived both extreme sides of the force and has found clairty and will stop at nothing to destory the Empire is intresting. They just need to retcon the Emperors stupid motivation since Drew is now gone because that motivation is just

[Chromie]

Mr.House wrote...

Skelter192 wrote...

slimgrin wrote...
 even when the series utilizes cliche, it either turns it on its head or just plain does it well. Like the Amnesia.

CDPR did managed to own the cliche. Many times have I played games with amnesiac protagonist and didn't bother to build on it. 

Revan was done better imo.

And what did Bioware do with it? We save the galaxy big deal and the amnesia is an important part of the character and story. Also  Obsidian made Revan awesome not Bioware.

Modifié par Skelter192, 12 mai 2012 - 09:13 .

[Addai]

Persephone wrote...
Having read all the literature above is why I'm not on board with the rampant TW2 worship. All I am saying. Neither the books nor the games are masterpieces of plot (The plot id typical RPG fanfare with some intrigue to spice it up.) or characterization. (That was particularly lacking. The protagonist had amnesia, to the point of forgetting people from the previous game.... and the few interesting folks were victims of cliched "bad boy/gal" scenes aka the reduction of Dethmold to an effeminate tool...and Radovid watching Philippa being tortured like a sociopath...) 

I don't worship the games, either.  I enjoy them and if I see them criticized unfairly, I object.  I'd do the same for other games I like and it doesn't mean I'm comparing them to Shakespeare. 

I don't recall Geralt forgetting anyone from the previous game.  Dethmold was a lot of fun, though you're right that he's one of the few you can consider truly slimy.  He was just fun to talk to, though.  Radovid was exercising cruelty that's very much in line with the normal actions of people in the Witcher world and especially the kings who are all ruthless.  These aren't very good criticisms, Perse, sorry.

Anyway, it's like old times on the DA2 board around here.  Brings a little tear to my eye.

[Brockololly]

Addai67 wrote...
The words "mature- immature" are getting thrown around and people are taking them personally.  Rather I would say that Letho represents a nuanced, complex antagonist, much as Loghain did.  The theme of mages in society started out being interesting in Origins, but by DA2 it was a hysterical, overblown farce.  The same theme in the Witcher games is treated with much more complexity.  Complexity is not always good- it can lead to a mess- but I think the execution of TW2's story was excellent.  It's an intelligent story that rewards thinking about it and replaying it from different approaches.  IMO the only way you can enjoy DA2's story is if you don't think about it very hard.

Yeah, my issue with DA2's Mages vs. Templar issue is that the debate surrounding it is interesting, yet the attempt to escalate the problem into a conflict and war felt incredibly forced and wasn't reliant on humans doing human things, but humans being possesed by Soul Calibur crazy swords and becoming a one note abominations. It turns into a very black and white affair- you have Anders going all kamikaze and Meredith and Orsino responding by turning into some monster thing. So you end up with both factions turning into inhuman monsters literally. Thats just kind of boring.

Contrast that with TW2, where you have your fair share of unlikeable people and factions but they're largely operating out of their own self interests, which on occasion will clash against each other. But they're almost always acting as people, not black and white demon abominations.

Like you said, TW2 and TW1 basically deal with the same sort of conflict as Mages/Templars with Humans/Non-humans or Humans/Sorceresses. Yet its almost always grounded in human motivations and self interest propelling the conflict and narrative, not supernatural elements that come out of the blue with little explanation.

[Lenimph]

 

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I didn't think it was necessary for me to write a sentence to explain why I bolded that word. But fine. Maturity is being developped of mind. When it comes to story, it's a story that is intellectually developped, in other words, complex,  thoughtful, nuanced....etc. 

And no, those who enjoy games that do not require much thinking to like are not idiots. 

   
Then I do not believe you proved your point that Dragon Age Origins isn't complex and thoughtful. All you have proven is that it borrows a common theme of Man vs. The Unknown. DA uses it as a backdrop for character development group interactions rather then emphasizing on it for the main plot. I don't see the immaturity in that, I just see a different approach.

I wont say much about TW2 since I stopped playing after the Kracken battle but I will say much of what I saw was coated in cliches which implies lower levels of thought and by your definition of "maturity" is immature.

Modifié par Lenimph, 12 mai 2012 - 09:15 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Skelter192 wrote...
And what did Bioware do with it? We save the galaxy big deal and the amnesia is an important part of the character and story. Also  Obsidian made Revan awesome not Bioware.

To be fair, the original Kotor hd some interesting concepts.
On Kashyyk we get to see Revan's modus operandi during the war, which was interesting. What the Jedi did to Revan, I saw, as character assassination and exploitation, but that's of course before Lucasart went in because obviously the light side can never do quesitonable things.

But I agree that Kotor 2 is what made Revan pre-Kotor interesting. Minus the true Sith part, but that was left so vague and ambiguous that I didn't think it would have necessarily ruined him. Of course ToR and its novels did just that.

[slimgrin]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

Alright. Yeah, you're annoyed, but cut the personal attacks.

There is no other logical explanation for his rhetorical style on display in this thread.

It is not a personal criticism, but a criticism of his argument.  If KoP is the arbiter of what constitutes a "mature" story, then his position makes sense.

If he's not - and he's not - then it's nothing but hot air attempting to lift a subjective preference into the rarified atmosphere of Truth.

He hasn't just procalimed it. He's explained his view in depth. Over and over. Hell, mature is just another term I'd do away with anyway. Along with 'dark'. 

Modifié par slimgrin, 12 mai 2012 - 09:16 .

[Serillen]

DA3 could be the best game to ever be made (it most likely wont) and I'm sure it will probably still create a huge negative backlash, just look at all the arguing going on in this thread. To me it seems like its primarily because people feel betrayed by Bioware moving away from the "traditional" RPG style, and I don't really see Bioware going back to the older school of RPG's so the complaints will likely continue.

[Persephone]

slimgrin wrote...

Persephone wrote...


Having read all the literature above is why I'm not on board with the rampant TW2 worship. All I am saying. Neither the books nor the games are masterpieces of plot (The plot id typical RPG fanfare with some intrigue to spice it up.) or characterization. (That was particularly lacking. The protagonist had amnesia, to the point of forgetting people from the previous game.... and the few interesting folks were victims of cliched "bad boy/gal" scenes aka the reduction of Dethmold to an effeminate tool...and Radovid watching Philippa being tortured like a sociopath...) 

And Michelangelo totally pwns Jim lee at figure drawing. I've read soem failry heavy literature too. the oddyssey and Beowulf are two of my favorite stories. I enjoy Kafka, Wells, etc. 

But assigning an order to mediums of artisitic expression simply is not a constructive excercise. In fact, it's a quick way to being close minded about other art forms. So in the context of gaming, for me TW represent a high point. Hell, even when the series utilizes cliche, it either turns it on its head or just plain does it well. Like the Amnesia.

Alright then, just in gaming context:

The character of April Ryan, her entire journey, beats CDPR's character writing on nearly all fronts. And Letho and any TW antagonist PALES compared to Baron Friedrich von Glower in Sierra's Gabriel Knight: The Beast Within. Here we are presented with an antagonist even the hero does not WANT to fight, he is that beguiling, that humane and relatable.

Their biggest offense is, IMHO, the idea that competent characters often portrayed as sociopaths (What was that about humanity  being sucked out?),, rapists (I really like Henselt despite him being one heck of a douche...but that was not necessary), or effeminate caricatures. Let's take another look at von Glower: A killer, a werewolf even....who is appalled at the idea of violence for the sake of enjoyment or simple bloodlust. An antagonist who will only fight the hero if cornered (Literally...) .... He kills, not to satisfy sadistic urges but for reasons he explains to the rather clueless hero at length...ensnaring the player to the point of wanting to save him, a sentiment Gabriel himself mentions in the game's epilogue.... Beats drinking with Letho any day IMHO. The conflict, there is no bowing out...there is actual, personal motivation....

Modifié par Persephone, 12 mai 2012 - 09:25 .