120 réponses à ce sujet

[Malificis]

Nosuchluck wrote...

OneBadAssMother wrote...

I'm surprised the game can provoke people to write essays. Not to put down the topic starter or anything - I actually agree with Malificis. But... interesting.

I surprisingly enough vaguely agree with Malificis on a few of his points but this topic got old a long time ago and there's far too many things I'd love to point out that would just be a waste of time as there's already threads discussing it.

Like - Why is Oghren so much of an indepth character?  Hell Loghain is obviously an example of a poorly written villian with a crap attempt at depth, seriously his lame arse excuse of "I did what I had to do" doesn't cut it. There's hardly any explanation or detail behind his utterly stupid actions and ignorance of the blight.

Dragon Age is good but it's not some perfect piece of art the OP is describing.

much better!
Well, Oghren is interesting because hes a far more realistic view of a warrior. "...they give you a sword and tell you to go and fight for your city.Its the best thing in the world. Until you try to live in the city you saved". This is a view to problem noticed among soldiers who put all their effort into fighting then cant live somewhere which is so different to what they've become acclimatised. Disillusioned and a pariah, you help him find Branca and its tragic.
I'm sure someone can argue the Oghren point better than I however.

Loghain is a case study on patriotic nationalism gone wrong, and no i dont think Loghain is poorly written or has  a lack of depth, I just think that you need to form your own opinions on him and look at his actions and words to get a view of him you arent just handed.

Its not perfect, of course not, but it is underappreciated.

[andysdead]

i write poetry.



i think it is very good poetry, and everyone who reads it always compliments me on it. i even received positive criticism from an English literature professor who is himself a published author.



you know what the problem is?



nobody cares. publishing companies don't believe that the general public is intelligent, cultured, or interested enough to read poetry by non-established writers, and in fact poetry as a genre seems to be going the way of the dinosaur.



of course, the public reinforces this belief.



in other words, i know what you mean. i have simply resigned myself to the fact that i am probably one of the last of a dying breed... an educated, intelligent, well-cultured creative individual.



in fact, i recently did some research that indicates that intelligence and education, from a strict Darwinian sense, are no longer survival traits and in fact actually decrease the likelihood of passing along genetic material.



in short, the Human Race is breeding itself dumber.

[Malificis]

Kanner wrote...

WoW leaves this game for dead, and THAT'S purely on a lore/questing basis. (honestly, you *like* the Maker, the 2 dimensional darkspawn, and the philosophy/psychology major demons? Soooo boring.)

Starcraft is the best strategy game ever released, period. There is no limit to how good you can get at Starcraft, kinda like chess.

Diablo was just Rogue/Moria/any old ASCII dungion crawl from the 80s, what made it fun was the realtime element.

Planescape is still the best writing to go into an RPG. Combat was never so great, alas.

Winnie the poo is awesome. Unless you're an american and have never encountered the source material. =/

So much faux-elitism here. I mean 'I like X, and X isn't popular with the masses, therefore they're all stupid.' More like 'I like Planescape: Torment, I am so freaking thankful that someone made such a great game for me even tho it wasn't a huge commerical success.'

oh god WoW is better on lore and questing? No, WARCRAFT indeed has a stronger world-level backstory than DAO because its much older. WoW rapes warcraft lore. darkspawn are kind of ordinary but ill take them over killing anub arak the amazing antihero as a lvl 63 in greens with a bunch of keyturning retards. that was so sad.

starcraft is basically modernised chess. i love starcraft. it has a great story too. see the end of my post oO
Devotion to the Maker is a more reality based idea of divinity. No real dislike of this, but its refreshing from old "gods on rampage" in other games.
whats wrong with the demons?
winnie the poo is fine but hardly complex. i liked it when i was 5
yes im an arrogant elitist. sorry. not so cut and dried as how you say it though.
yeah im freaking thankful games like this are still made. it just annoys me people dont appreciate it.

Modifié par Malificis, 09 décembre 2009 - 11:16 .

[Statulos]

Kanner wrote...

WoW leaves this game for dead, and THAT'S purely on a lore/questing basis. (honestly, you *like* the Maker, the 2 dimensional darkspawn, and the philosophy/psychology major demons? Soooo boring.)

Starcraft is the best strategy game ever released, period. There is no limit to how good you can get at Starcraft, kinda like chess.

Diablo was just Rogue/Moria/any old ASCII dungion crawl from the 80s, what made it fun was the realtime element.

Planescape is still the best writing to go into an RPG. Combat was never so great, alas.

Winnie the poo is awesome. Unless you're an american and have never encountered the source material. =/

So much faux-elitism here. I mean 'I like X, and X isn't popular with the masses, therefore they're all stupid.' More like 'I like Planescape: Torment, I am so freaking thankful that someone made such a great game for me even tho it wasn't a huge commerical success.'

The argument of "it sells-therfore it´s cool" is basicaly crap. 
Elitism is XVI culture: during that time in which just a chosen few had access to it; nowdays it´s not called elitism, it´s called being lazy.  You have access to almost whatever in modern, Western societies (if you´re writing from Iran; I understand that you´re ****ed up because your goverment basicaly does not want you to have access to culture).

In the examples you point out, if you consider a "clicking like high on cocaine game" to be strategy, seems like we have very different concepts of what that word means. Even more, Starcraft is at most, tactics and not even that.

[KnightofPhoenix]

andysdead wrote...
in fact, i recently did some research that indicates that intelligence and education, from a strict Darwinian sense, are no longer survival traits and in fact actually decrease the likelihood of passing along genetic material.

in short, the Human Race is breeding itself dumber.

It's the era of specialisation. People are not educated, they are trained. People show great knowldge and skill in one field only, but are very ignorant about the rest.
I have met great doctors, they know everything about their specific field in medecine. But they have 0 knowledge about history, or politics or philosophy, or art.

That's the result of the division of labor and the capitalist system. Things that don't produce money are worthless and in order to amass money, you need to specialise in one field and forget the rest, someone else would do them.

[Nosuchluck]

The problem I had with Loghain is he was built up as a really bad person. If you play a noble my father was killed by a guy under his command and he puts his own agenda above that of the country by betraying the king in a crucial fight then abandoning the rest of an army to the Darkspawn and allowing half the bloody country to be pillaged. Even when you get him as a companion he doesn't really explain his actions any better. It really annoyed me considering I sacrificed Alistair in an attempt to get a better understanding of Loghains character.



I like Oghren but he does seriously feel like a sterotypical dwarf from any other setting. He's funny.. he's drunk and he's a warrior. I admit he does have more depth than the usual dwarf companion but I would of just liked something entirely different than usual.

[RunCDFirst]

Malificis wrote...
stuff

I'm having a really hard time trying to figure out what your point is.

If you really want to get on the 'Video Games as Art' bandwagon, I suggest you check out Ice Pick Lodge. Sadly, they're Russian and thus their games are impossible to find, but you'll see examples of how a video game is more substance than just pure entertainment.

As for your comment on people 'getting' Dragon Age, I ask you: What is there to get? Dragon Age is very much in line with modern novels and older novels - it's designed to entertain. Sure, it briefly touches on deeper themes like Obsession or The Shadow Self, but it's primary goal is to entertain nevertheless. It's very much like MW2, only it seeks to entertain a different audience. I don't go to a cubist art exhibit and tell people to learn how to properly paint proportions, likewise I wouldn't want someone playing Dragon Age and complaining that hitting the buttons doesn't make the character swing faster. Some games are going to be story light because they focus on other gaming aspects.

And expecting everyone to desire a novel when playing games is unrealistic. It doesn't speak that there's something inherently 'wrong' with society. 

Dragon Age also isn't in a contest with Modern Warfare 2 or World of Warcraft. There isn't an industry race to see who can accumulate the most money. Also, Dragon Age is doing very well for itself, perhaps better than many people expected of an Old School RPG. 

I'll wrap up with a little pearl of wisdom. Nothing is original. All ideas have been done before. There isn't a single story that hasn't been told in one shape or another. What is unique, what is interesting about our art, is more the telling of the tale than the tale itself. 

Also, sequels sell. Expect DAO 2 to be more of the same.

Modifié par RunCDFirst, 09 décembre 2009 - 11:29 .

[Nosuchluck]

Statulos wrote...

Kanner wrote...

WoW leaves this game for dead, and THAT'S purely on a lore/questing basis. (honestly, you *like* the Maker, the 2 dimensional darkspawn, and the philosophy/psychology major demons? Soooo boring.)

Starcraft is the best strategy game ever released, period. There is no limit to how good you can get at Starcraft, kinda like chess.

Diablo was just Rogue/Moria/any old ASCII dungion crawl from the 80s, what made it fun was the realtime element.

Planescape is still the best writing to go into an RPG. Combat was never so great, alas.

Winnie the poo is awesome. Unless you're an american and have never encountered the source material. =/

So much faux-elitism here. I mean 'I like X, and X isn't popular with the masses, therefore they're all stupid.' More like 'I like Planescape: Torment, I am so freaking thankful that someone made such a great game for me even tho it wasn't a huge commerical success.'

The argument of "it sells-therfore it´s cool" is basicaly crap. 
Elitism is XVI culture: during that time in which just a chosen few had access to it; nowdays it´s not called elitism, it´s called being lazy.  You have access to almost whatever in modern, Western societies (if you´re writing from Iran; I understand that you´re ****ed up because your goverment basicaly does not want you to have access to culture).

In the examples you point out, if you consider a "clicking like high on cocaine game" to be strategy, seems like we have very different concepts of what that word means. Even more, Starcraft is at most, tactics and not even that.

Very few things which sell well are actually crap. Modern Warfare 2 might not be the best game ever but it's still very good. Usuall stuff is popular because, well it's very good or atleast good.

Also, even people who don't like Starcraft admit it's probably one of the best RTS games ever. I prefer supreme commander myself but as it's rarely patched and it's still has bugs which need fixing I can't really say it's on the same scale.

[Statulos]

Take out the fact that Oghren is a dwarf for a second. A great warrior, a killing machine actually is dumped by a person he basicaly loved to death and his whole world falls apart. Pointless violence and alcohol sounds like a real way out to that situation but in fact, those turn into just a downward spiral.



I´d buy that story, sure.

[OneBadAssMother]

He's funny.. he's drunk and he's a warrior.

And a perv heh

I would of just liked something entirely different than usual.

The chanter priest in Ozammar or Dagna xD I've noticed most of the dwarves are rather moderate in their drinking however.

[andysdead]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

andysdead wrote...
in fact, i recently did some research that indicates that intelligence and education, from a strict Darwinian sense, are no longer survival traits and in fact actually decrease the likelihood of passing along genetic material.

in short, the Human Race is breeding itself dumber.

It's the era of specialisation. People are not educated, they are trained. People show great knowldge and skill in one field only, but are very ignorant about the rest.
I have met great doctors, they know everything about their specific field in medecine. But they have 0 knowledge about history, or politics or philosophy, or art.

That's the result of the division of labor and the capitalist system. Things that don't produce money are worthless and in order to amass money, you need to specialise in one field and forget the rest, someone else would do them.

no, no, it's not just that.

it's the fact that there is a significant, inverse linear relationship between intelligence, education, and number of children.

additionally, there is NO relationship between education and frequency of sex. in other words, being better educated doesn't mean you will have sex more often, and it does mean that you will have less children.

so. it's like that guy Harvey Danger once said, "only stupid people are breeding."

[BroBear Berbil]

I often wonder why we seem to get dumber despite the fact that we have more educated people than any other point in history. It would seem to me that the answer is simply culture.

Just take a look at all the FPS games. They can churn out endless WW2 FPS games, each with slightly better graphics, and people eat them up. Or it can be about space marines instead. It must contain ample amounts of explosions and as little of that inconvenient and boring thing called dialogue though. I find it funny and sad that a lot of developers are deliberately making their games shallow because the players they cater to have such short attention spans. Of course, I do like Left4Dead. I'm not expecting dialogue with it, just lots of dead zombies and it's great at that.

And everything these days is an e-sport. Heck, even this game was showcased as an e-sport with that odd competition they did a few days prior to release to see which team could beat the game first. It was almost enough to make me think twice about buying the game as I honestly had low expectations to begin with not because I didn't like other BioWare games I played but just because of where games seem to be going. I can understand the marketing strategy to appeal to that demographic though.

Needless to say I was pleasantly surprised by DA and I can easily say that it's my favorite game. I just hope that future installments aren't dumbed-down.

Modifié par OnionXI, 09 décembre 2009 - 11:31 .

[red8x]

We're talking about a game, right? A product that Bioware/EA put out for profit? If they made a profit, people appreciated it. Once they have your money how else is the customer supposed to give their opinions about the game? The forums is just like the 'suggestions box' at McDonald's. It allows the company to see what customers really thought of their product after consumption. Despite some criticisms, constructive or otherwise, I would say that the game was well received and I don't think Bioware is in any way suffering for their 'art'.

Modifié par red8x, 09 décembre 2009 - 11:32 .

[Nosuchluck]

Statulos wrote...

Take out the fact that Oghren is a dwarf for a second. A great warrior, a killing machine actually is dumped by a person he basicaly loved to death and his whole world falls apart. Pointless violence and alcohol sounds like a real way out to that situation but in fact, those turn into just a downward spiral.

I´d buy that story, sure.

I don't think the story is bad surrounding Oghren. It's just the problem is he's a dwarf and the alcholic dwarven fighter has been done to death. When I was a kid I read a lot of William king slayer novels and NwN2 really increased my annoyance towards the sterotypical dwarf.

I guess what really annoys me the most is that we had so many examples of awsome dwarf characters. I geniunly would of liked to take Branka along as a companion. Even though she was clearly insane I sympathised with her want to protect her people. It was similiar to how Grey Warden's are willing to do anything to stop a Blight.

[Deflagratio]

Nosuchluck wrote...

OneBadAssMother wrote...

I'm surprised the game can provoke people to write essays. Not to put down the topic starter or anything - I actually agree with Malificis. But... interesting.

I surprisingly enough vaguely agree with Malificis on a few of his points but this topic got old a long time ago and there's far too many things I'd love to point out that would just be a waste of time as there's already threads discussing it.

Like - Why is Oghren so much of an indepth character?  [>]Hell Loghain is obviously an example of a poorly written villian with a crap attempt at depth, seriously his lame arse excuse of "I did what I had to do"[<] WAT doesn't cut it. There's hardly any explanation or detail behind his utterly stupid actions and ignorance of the blight.

Dragon Age is good but it's not some perfect piece of art the OP is describing.

Loghain fought for almost half of his life to drive the Orlesian Empire out of Ferelden. Cailin was going to invite the military back into Ferelden to assist with the blight. A real world analogy: America(Orlais) fought of the Hussein Regime (Blight) and yet the still remain an occupying nation. Loghain had extremely understandable motivations, you're comment just shows an absurd lack of comprehension.

[Malificis]

Nosuchluck wrote...

The problem I had with Loghain is he was built up as a really bad person. If you play a noble my father was killed by a guy under his command and he puts his own agenda above that of the country by betraying the king in a crucial fight then abandoning the rest of an army to the Darkspawn and allowing half the bloody country to be pillaged. Even when you get him as a companion he doesn't really explain his actions any better. It really annoyed me considering I sacrificed Alistair in an attempt to get a better understanding of Loghains character.

I like Oghren but he does seriously feel like a sterotypical dwarf from any other setting. He's funny.. he's drunk and he's a warrior. I admit he does have more depth than the usual dwarf companion but I would of just liked something entirely different than usual.

Howe wasnt necessarily in Loghain's employ at this point...just like Howe didn't necessarily order Eamon's death by poison...
thats the thing though. Does he? Loghain is patriotism gone wrong in an arguably good man. If you did sacrifice Alistair you would have. He has some similarities with Ammon Jerro out of NWN2.
Loghain arguably believes he can save Ferelden without the Orlesians the the Wardens. He sees the king as a foolish boy (to an extent, he is) who is acting over his head - "and you will remember who is king, Loghain". Cailan seemed like an idiot to me at first glance. Loghain believes he can counter Orlesian influence by killing of Ferelden's wardens and still fight the darkspawn with his own army at his command. "Everything i have done i have done for Ferelden". Is he really acting merely on self interest? He thinks he can do things better than the king and the only way is for the king to die, for the good of Ferelden and its independence. 
turns out hes wrong - it IS a blight and Orlais DOESNT invade. But you cant think of this like a gamer, because lives are at stake as far as the game world is concerned and no one knows what will happen - Ferelden hasnt been indepedent that long.
does it make him a bad guy? Was he just acting for himself? To what extent are his actions justified? The banns wont come into line and wont see his point of view, to an extent understandably so. you're called to be arrested because you're a problem in his vision of the Greater Good. The hyper-patriotic nationalist ruthless hero of Ferelden or Maniac who wants to be King and doesnt give a damn?
so yeah, fairly complex character.

[RunCDFirst]

Deflagratio wrote...
Loghain fought for almost half of his life to drive the Orlesian Empire out of Ferelden. Cailin was going to invite the military back into Ferelden to assist with the blight. A real world analogy: America(Orlais) fought of the Hussein Regime (Blight) and yet the still remain an occupying nation. Loghain had extremely understandable motivations, you're comment just shows an absurd lack of comprehension.

Don't forget that Loghain is right, you don't need the Orlesians to stop the Blight. 

I don't have a problem with that particular stance of Loghain's. It's the selling of slaves that really digs the grave though.

[KnightofPhoenix]

OnionXI wrote...
Or it can be about space marines instead.

That's one of the biggest tragidies imo. WArhammer 40K had one of the most interesting lore ever. There was something tragic about the Space Marines. People who are genetically mutated and turned into fanatical weapons designed to save humanity, but end up frightening and killing their fellow man. Today, we instead are having Space Marines potrayed as super heroes! Really tragic.

[OneBadAssMother]

Deflagratio Loghain fought for almost half of his life to drive the Orlesian Empire out of Ferelden. Cailin was going to invite the military back into Ferelden to assist with the blight. A real world analogy: America(Orlais) fought of the Hussein Regime (Blight) and yet the still remain an occupying nation. Loghain had extremely understandable motivations, you're comment just shows an absurd lack of comprehension.

On Nosuchluck's defence I don't think you can seriously expect everyone to understand politics, and hence their inability to completely understand Loghain. Doesn't mean his comment shows an absurb lack of comprehension.

[Malificis]

RunCDFirst wrote...

Deflagratio wrote...
Loghain fought for almost half of his life to drive the Orlesian Empire out of Ferelden. Cailin was going to invite the military back into Ferelden to assist with the blight. A real world analogy: America(Orlais) fought of the Hussein Regime (Blight) and yet the still remain an occupying nation. Loghain had extremely understandable motivations, you're comment just shows an absurd lack of comprehension.

Don't forget that Loghain is right, you don't need the Orlesians to stop the Blight. 

I don't have a problem with that particular stance of Loghain's. It's the selling of slaves that really digs the grave though.

Greater Good. You dont understand Loghain if you think he cares about this.
twist on the absolute epitome of fanatic ultra patriot.
oh and elves are second class citizens here. dont forget that. think less as a 2009 gamer and more as a character in ferelden...

Modifié par Malificis, 09 décembre 2009 - 11:36 .

[andysdead]

Deflagratio wrote...

Nosuchluck wrote...

OneBadAssMother wrote...

I'm surprised the game can provoke people to write essays. Not to put down the topic starter or anything - I actually agree with Malificis. But... interesting.

I surprisingly enough vaguely agree with Malificis on a few of his points but this topic got old a long time ago and there's far too many things I'd love to point out that would just be a waste of time as there's already threads discussing it.

Like - Why is Oghren so much of an indepth character?  [>]Hell Loghain is obviously an example of a poorly written villian with a crap attempt at depth, seriously his lame arse excuse of "I did what I had to do"[<] WAT doesn't cut it. There's hardly any explanation or detail behind his utterly stupid actions and ignorance of the blight.

Dragon Age is good but it's not some perfect piece of art the OP is describing.

Loghain fought for almost half of his life to drive the Orlesian Empire out of Ferelden. Cailin was going to invite the military back into Ferelden to assist with the blight. A real world analogy: America(Orlais) fought of the Hussein Regime (Blight) and yet the still remain an occupying nation. Loghain had extremely understandable motivations, you're comment just shows an absurd lack of comprehension.

your point is valid, but your analogy fails.

A better analogy would be America invades Afghanistan, wins the war, moves to Iraq and asks the Taliban for help in Iraq.

[Malificis]

andysdead wrote...

Deflagratio wrote...

Nosuchluck wrote...

OneBadAssMother wrote...

I'm surprised the game can provoke people to write essays. Not to put down the topic starter or anything - I actually agree with Malificis. But... interesting.

I surprisingly enough vaguely agree with Malificis on a few of his points but this topic got old a long time ago and there's far too many things I'd love to point out that would just be a waste of time as there's already threads discussing it.

Like - Why is Oghren so much of an indepth character?  [>]Hell Loghain is obviously an example of a poorly written villian with a crap attempt at depth, seriously his lame arse excuse of "I did what I had to do"[<] WAT doesn't cut it. There's hardly any explanation or detail behind his utterly stupid actions and ignorance of the blight.

Dragon Age is good but it's not some perfect piece of art the OP is describing.

Loghain fought for almost half of his life to drive the Orlesian Empire out of Ferelden. Cailin was going to invite the military back into Ferelden to assist with the blight. A real world analogy: America(Orlais) fought of the Hussein Regime (Blight) and yet the still remain an occupying nation. Loghain had extremely understandable motivations, you're comment just shows an absurd lack of comprehension.

your point is valid, but your analogy fails.

A better analogy would be America invades Afghanistan, wins the war, moves to Iraq and asks the Taliban for help in Iraq.

argh keep on topic please. can see this spiralling into world politics soon.

[Malificis]

andysdead wrote...

Deflagratio wrote...

Nosuchluck wrote...

OneBadAssMother wrote...

I'm surprised the game can provoke people to write essays. Not to put down the topic starter or anything - I actually agree with Malificis. But... interesting.

I surprisingly enough vaguely agree with Malificis on a few of his points but this topic got old a long time ago and there's far too many things I'd love to point out that would just be a waste of time as there's already threads discussing it.

Like - Why is Oghren so much of an indepth character?  [>]Hell Loghain is obviously an example of a poorly written villian with a crap attempt at depth, seriously his lame arse excuse of "I did what I had to do"[<] WAT doesn't cut it. There's hardly any explanation or detail behind his utterly stupid actions and ignorance of the blight.

Dragon Age is good but it's not some perfect piece of art the OP is describing.

Loghain fought for almost half of his life to drive the Orlesian Empire out of Ferelden. Cailin was going to invite the military back into Ferelden to assist with the blight. A real world analogy: America(Orlais) fought of the Hussein Regime (Blight) and yet the still remain an occupying nation. Loghain had extremely understandable motivations, you're comment just shows an absurd lack of comprehension.

your point is valid, but your analogy fails.

A better analogy would be America invades Afghanistan, wins the war, moves to Iraq and asks the Taliban for help in Iraq.

argh keep on topic please. can see this spiralling into world politics soon.

[Nosuchluck]

Deflagratio wrote...

Nosuchluck wrote...

OneBadAssMother wrote...

I'm surprised the game can provoke people to write essays. Not to put down the topic starter or anything - I actually agree with Malificis. But... interesting.

I surprisingly enough vaguely agree with Malificis on a few of his points but this topic got old a long time ago and there's far too many things I'd love to point out that would just be a waste of time as there's already threads discussing it.

Like - Why is Oghren so much of an indepth character?  [>]Hell Loghain is obviously an example of a poorly written villian with a crap attempt at depth, seriously his lame arse excuse of "I did what I had to do"[<] WAT doesn't cut it. There's hardly any explanation or detail behind his utterly stupid actions and ignorance of the blight.

Dragon Age is good but it's not some perfect piece of art the OP is describing.

Loghain fought for almost half of his life to drive the Orlesian Empire out of Ferelden. Cailin was going to invite the military back into Ferelden to assist with the blight. A real world analogy: America(Orlais) fought of the Hussein Regime (Blight) and yet the still remain an occupying nation. Loghain had extremely understandable motivations, you're comment just shows an absurd lack of comprehension.

Absurd lack of comprehension = Not reading the books? I hardly knew anything about Orlais throughout the game and that certainly doesn't explain Loghain selling elves as slaves or posioning old men, splitting the country in half and ignoring the Blight.

Also, the safety of your country should be more important than grudges. English are allies with America even though you guys chucked us out of your country, we're still friends with germany even though they're the cause of two world wars. The impression I got from Loghain was an insane idiot stuck in his glory days and uncapable of seeing the true enemy. That's hardly an enemy I can sympathise with or understand, especially considering he had my family murdered.

[Felene]

I think it is because games like DA:O are made for mature people who truly enjoy "intelligent" RP.

Which is not for [everyone].

You have to think about the story, how will you choose, how will you act on certain type of situation, your objective is clear, but there are many ways to achieve it, player makes the choice, and story change around it.

Times like this is when I truly appreciate Bioware for bring a game like DA:O.

Thank you Bioware!