634 réponses à ce sujet

[KnightofPhoenix]

Lenimph wrote...
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 invite you to go back and read what I said.

I said Origins' *main premise* was immature. However, its characters were for the most part very well done (we are stuck with Howes, Vaughns, Brankas and Uldreds, but they are a minority). A lot of its issues were well done. Though I am not a fan of the whole demon thing, some demons were portrayed very well. The Templars / Mages were portrayed in a subtle way. And though not a masterpiece of politics in games, Orzammar and the Landsmeet were relatively well done.

There is a lot in Origins that is complex and thoughtful, which is why it was and still remains one of my favorite games. But its main premsie is immature. Same with Mass Effect.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 12 mai 2012 - 09:19 .

[Lenimph]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I invite you to go back and read what I said.

I said Origins' *main premise* was immature. However, its characters were for the most part very well done (we are stuck with Howes, Vaughns, Brankas and Uldreds, but they are a minority). A lot of its issues were well done. Though I am not a fan of the whole demon thing, some demons were portrayed very well. The Templars / Mages were portrayed in a subtle way. And though not a masterpiece of politics in games, Orzammar and the Landsmeet were well done.

There is a lot in Origins that is complex and thoughtful, which is why it was and still remains one of my favorite games. But its main premsie is immature.

 Go back and read what I said.  

DA:O's main premise is not the Wardens vs Big bad archdemon. 

[MingWolf]

Brockololly wrote...

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.

Ah, this! 

[Yrkoon]

slimgrin wrote...

@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.

Wait.  Hold up a second.  I was going to walk away from this thread for the evening, but then I saw this and decided that it can't go un-responded to.

My take of witcher 2 is that it's  one of the best games  to come out in the last 10 years.  I love it.  I've played it 10 times. and will probably do another playthrough in a few days, when I retire my current Skyrim character.

My "trite" was  intentional, to make a point.  I was deliberately employing the same generalizing, minimalist mindset in describing its plot as KOP was when he was discribing  DA:O earier on this thread.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 12 mai 2012 - 09:24 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Persephone wrote...
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.

How are characters often portrayed as sociopaths?
And you think kings didn't rape women as spoils of war when they wanted to?

You are honestly going to tell me that Radovid watching Philippa's eyes being gorged out (no humanity being sucked out at all), is the same as Grace being possessed by a demon and massacring her allies? Be serious.

[slimgrin]

Persephone wrote...

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 antagonist 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....

Your description of Baron Friedrich is exactly how I see Letho. And Dethmold isn't an effeminate caricature. He's ruthless, demented, and gay ( most likely gay). I thought it was an interesting combination. Drinking with Letho and then telling him to get the hell out of dodge is one of my favorite gaming moments.

Modifié par slimgrin, 12 mai 2012 - 09:37 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Lenimph wrote...
Go back and read what I said.  

DA:O's main premise is not the Wardens vs Big bad archdemon. 

Except it is. That's its main plot and everything you do is to reach that goal.

[Persephone]

Addai67 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...) 

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.

Shani.

If you side with the elves & dwarves in TW1, there is no reflection back to that choice when dealing with Iorveth & his followers.

I do not mind Dethmold being slimy. I mind the "effeminate schemer" cliche.

Torture for the sake of torture is pointless. If a ruler wants to eliminate a threat, he should do so & cut out the cat & mouse sociopath act.

[upsettingshorts]

Whatever do you mean Yrkoon, are you saying that people can exploit the vagueness of language, cement their perspective, and orient their premise, to suit their purposes in order to advance an agenda?

Unheard of.

Maybe sometimes people should try and point out when others are doing this. Or maybe not, they seem to take it personally and get defensive.

It is, in any event, extremely tiresome.

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

[TheMufflon]

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

Pfwa! Of the examples you listed only Leo Tolstoy ever wrote a plot worth the name (and maybe, [i]maybe[\\i] Marlowe. On a good day. 

slimgrin wrote...

 I've read some fairly heavy literature too. The Odyssey and Beowulf are two of my favorite stories 

Ah yes, the nursery rhymes of heavy literature!

[Lenimph]

I'm just going to stop talking to the wall. 

[KnightofPhoenix]

Persephone wrote...
Torture for the sake of torture is pointless. If a ruler wants to eliminate a threat, he should do so & cut out the cat & mouse sociopath act.

Because you think Radovid obtained the moniker of "The Stern", the basis of his image as a ruler in a country that almost collapsed in civil war because of scheming nobles, acquired it because he was nice?
It's torture for the sake of image and deterrence, coupeld with personal anger.

[slimgrin]

Persephone wrote...

Torture for the sake of torture is pointless

They sure didn't think so in the middle ages, which is the template for Witcher lore. And Radovid was getting revenge there. There's a specific reason for his act of cruelty. 

[TheMufflon]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

And you think kings didn't rape women as spoils of war when they wanted to?

Begging the question.

[android654]

Persephone wrote...
Torture for the sake of torture is pointless. If a ruler wants to eliminate a threat, he should do so & cut out the cat & mouse sociopath act.

Spare the rod...

It's pretty common knowledge than in a less enlightened time period, the act of "making an example out of someone" would be necessary in removing a threat, not simply removing them.

[Thor Rand Al]

Welp as one who didn't have a problem with DA2, nope I don't see a shytstorm for DA3. DA2 was a good game despite the flaws.
Instead of thinking the worst with all the negativiity talk try and be more positive esecially since the devs are trying to work with the fans. I have faith.

[slimgrin]

TheMufflon wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

And you think kings didn't rape women as spoils of war when they wanted to?

Begging the question.

Sniping from the sidelines.

[KnightofPhoenix]

TheMufflon wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

And you think kings didn't rape women as spoils of war when they wanted to?

Begging the question.

Obviously when kings wanted to.

[Persephone]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Persephone wrote...
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.

How are characters often portrayed as sociopaths?
And you think kings didn't rape women as spoils of war when they wanted to?

You are honestly going to tell me that Radovid watching Philippa's eyes being gorged out (no humanity being sucked out at all), is the same as Grace being possessed by a demon and massacring her allies? Be serious.

The situation with Henselt isn't a "spoils of war" scenario. It's not like Caesar letting loose his troops to rape & pillage the population of Alesia to establish dominance and bribe his troops with the spoils of war. There is a reasonable motivation, in Henselt's case it's just sadism and juvenile lust.

Grace's psychological breakdown is based on years of abuse (Ever listened to Alain describing being raped at the Gallows?), losing the only man she ever loved & looked up to...Is it unreasonable? Yes. Does it make sense? Sadly, yes.

[TheMufflon]

slimgrin wrote...

Sniping from the sidelines.

Where else would you propose I snipe from?

[KnightofPhoenix]

Persephone wrote...
The situation with Henselt isn't a "spoils of war" scenario. It's not like Caesar letting loose his troops to rape & pillage the population of Alesia to establish dominance and bribe his troops with the spoils of war. There is a reasonable motivation, in Henselt's case it's just sadism and juvenile lust.

Grace's psychological breakdown is based on years of abuse (Ever listened to Alain describing being raped at the Gallows?), losing the only man she ever loved & looked up to...Is it unreasonable? Yes. Does it make sense? Sadly, yes.

It's a spoil of war, the Blue Stripes were enemies who were massacred and he got the girl.
It is sadism, how is that not human? Henselt's character, as I demonstrated to you in the Witcher thread, goes beyond that one act. That's why he is multi-faceted. Curelty considered as the norm at the time period is part of his character.

And so the demons were necessary why? Grace couldn't have developped as an enemy of her own accord (in a better done way, not lol I am going to kill the few Templars who actualylwant to help me) why?
Please, it's incomparable.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 12 mai 2012 - 09:35 .

[Chromie]

TheMufflon wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

Sniping from the sidelines.

Where else would you propose I snipe from?

Those antlers.

[AlanC9]

TheMufflon wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

Sniping from the sidelines.

Where else would you propose I snipe from?

A bell tower is classic.

[Persephone]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Persephone wrote...
Torture for the sake of torture is pointless. If a ruler wants to eliminate a threat, he should do so & cut out the cat & mouse sociopath act.

Because you think Radovid obtained the moniker of "The Stern", the basis of his image as a ruler in a country that almost collapsed in civil war because of scheming nobles, acquired it because he was nice?
It's torture for the sake of image and deterrence, coupeld with personal anger.

My point being: I admire ruthless determination & competent scheming. It has nothing to do with being nice or kind. One of England's personally NICEST (!) and artless rulers gained the moniker "Bloody" because of her misguided acts of violence to save her people's souls through fire and torture.

Anger and revenge aren't motivations I consider competent or admirable. It is why I do not care for Alistair's tantrums at the Landsmeet. Not saying that Radovid & Alistair are alike. It is their motivations I question & finally discard as pointless.

[TheMufflon]

Skelter192 wrote...

Those antlers.

Deers have antlers. Sheep have horns.