177 réponses à ce sujet

[Lasien]

Renmiri1 wrote...

Nizaris1 wrote...

DA2 is not complex at all, you only need to choose between two factions

DA:O is more complex, you have too choose many factions that determine who will follow you in the final battle. You also have to choose who will lead the country. Everything you do effect the ending.

Is not the  number of factions that makes something complex or not.

The two factions on DA2 are not manicheist, ther is no 100% good faction or 100% evil faction. Unlike DAO where darkspawn are inherently evil,  Loghain is inherently evil. Demons and Uldred are evil. Dwarves are good, Dalish elves are good...

Chosing to get Dwarves involved is a no brainer. Choosing to side with templars or mages is not that simple. A mage just killed a lot of innocent people. The Templar commander is a madwoman. There are not clear cut decisions.

Hey! Loghain wasn't evil, he was just overzealous and sociopathic! 

[TEWR]

Christ, the lag on my computer's bad tonight.

Renmiri1 wrote...

Loghain is inherently evil

False. See here: http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/3qr8kr/

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 04 septembre 2012 - 07:04 .

[Plaintiff]

There is no such thing as "inherent" evil. "Evil" is a concept invented by humans.

The darkspawn are a destructive force that serves no useful function, and certainly ought to be removed from the equation, but they are not evil. They just are. With the exception of Awakened individuals, I doubt that they are capable of even understanding the concept of morality

Loghain is not "evil" either, but there's nothing ambiguous about his situation. Supporting him is an objectively terrible choice. He is untrustworthy (in both a personal and professional sense), mentally ill, and not very bright. Regardless of your feelings about Maric and Ostagar, there is no question that Loghain is a traitor to his country and its people. His actions as regent (poisoning Eamon, supporting Uldred, selling the elves into slavery) serve only to further weaken and divide a country that was already in a precarious position.

I get the impression that many people support him because his character's history, and his status as a war veteren and fallen hero evoke sympathy. But whatever Loghain used to be, he's not that man anymore. He is not an asset to Ferelden and he is not an asset to the Wardens.

Who do you want at your side when you're fighting a tainted dragon? An old, mentally infirm man with poor judgement and a history of betrayal, who just lost a duel to a regular person? Or a young, able-bodied warrior who has proven to be consistently trustworthy for the better part of a year? 

Modifié par Plaintiff, 04 septembre 2012 - 08:11 .

[GodWood]

Renmiri1 wrote...
We don't imprison lepers and the mentally ill anymore.

Yes, instead we institutionalize them.
Not that lepers or the mentally ill are remotely comparable to the dangers of mages

In what society is it right to imprison someone for what they MIGHT do ? Or to confine infected people for decades ?

If there was no way to cure the infected permanent quarantine seems like a logical solution (outside of just killing them outright)
Would you rather we spread the plague to the masses in the name of liberty.

Renmiri1 wrote...
Is not the  number of factions that makes something complex or not.

The two factions on DA2 are not manicheist, ther is no 100% good faction or 100% evil faction. Unlike DAO where darkspawn are inherently evil,  Loghain is inherently evil.

Ugh, not this again.

Loghain is perhaps one of the most complex characters Bioware has ever written. His actions inspired hundreds of threads that both condemned and justified his actions throughout the course of the game. He was not a perfect figure, he was flawed, but that does not mean he was inherent evil. To say that only shows how little thought you put into the game.

Dwarves are good

Dwarves (like every other humanoid faction in the game) are morally grey, neither completely good nor evil. One need only look to the politics of dwarven society and the major dwarf decision in DA:O to see that.

Can you at least try not to be intellectually dishonest.

[Fiacre]

Lasien wrote...

You do realize that all of your examples come from kirkwall - which is, so far, the worst circle excepting tevinter? I would wager that most circles don't do that sort of thing, and, if a templar does, he is punished.  The ferelden circle wasn't anywhere near as bad. The only real "injustice" was the threat of turning a mage tranquil because he was suspected of blood magic - which he was actually using.

...?

What I've heard of Asunder doesn't sound too promising. And some of the
Starkhaven mages tell us the Circle there was pretty bad as well. And
Anders tells us that he was *lucky* not to be raped -- and he was in the
Fereldan Circle. Aneirin, a fourteen year old, gets run through and
left for dead for trying to run away, without any proof that he was
actually a maleficar. Anders was kept in solitary confinement for a year
(which is pretty damn terrible, no matter how many times he may have
tried to escape). Cullen tells us in the mage origin that he knows
Templars that talk with glee about slaughtering mages. We know that
there's a relatively high suicide rate in Circles. The mages in the
Ferelden Circle still feel that their treatment was bad enough to
warrant a rebellion -- Uldred screwed up and was possessed, true, but
what actually happened wasn't the initial plan and the blood mage we
meet tells us that they just wanted freedom. Irving himself tells us
that if you want to survive, you have to learn the rules and is very
cynical and disillusioned regarding the system and the Chantry.

...I was going to bold everything that wasn't about Kirkwall, but... well. ...Perhaps we can strike the suicide rates? I can't remember where exactly that was stated. But in any case, that still leaves things that I hadn't even mentioned --- like Wynne's son being taken away, people not being allowed to see their family again (Finn seems to be the exception, rather than the rule -- if he actually meets them and doesn't just get presents and letters), Rylock simply declaring anders a murder and hunting him down even after he becomes a Warden. I'm pretty sure she evn threatened to kill the Warden and the others in the party. (Which is especially silly if your PC isn't just the Warden-Commander and Arl/essa of Amaranthine, but also the Hero of Ferelden, Chancellor/Teyrn/a of Gwaren and even the prince/ss-consort.)

[sylvanaerie]

Nizaris1 wrote...

The ending of DA2
- side Templar - kill Orsino, then kill Meredith, become a hero of the Templar, Mages rebel, Hawke disappear
- side Mages - kill Orsino, then kill Meredith, become a hero of the Mages, Mages rebel, Hawke disappear

The endings of DA:O
- side Mages - the mages become a part of the army, Warden may ask for mages freedom
- side Templar - the templars become a part of the army, some Templars goes nut
- side Dalish 1 - werewolves are gone, Dalish become a part of the army, Zathrian lead Dalish but soon have conflict with human again
- side werewolves - dalish is gone, werewolves become a part of the army, they are respected but soon have conflict with human, werewolves being hunted down
- side Dalish 2 - the curse is break, Dalish become a part of the army, layana become a Keeper and dalish-human have better relationship
- side Harrowmont - dwarves become a part of the army, harrowmont lead Dwarves to doom
- side Bhelen - dwarves become a part of the army, Bhelen lead Dwarves to glory
- Alistair may become a king
- Alistair may become a king with Anora as a queen
- Warden may become a king alone
- Warden may become a king with Anora as a queen
- Warden may become a queen/consort/caunsellor/bann
- Alistair may become a king and Loghain live
- Alistair may become a king and Loghain dead
- Warden/Alistair/Loghain may doing the dark ritual with Morrigan
- Warden/Alistair/Loghain may die killing Archdemon

All our actions in DA:O give effects in the epilogue, such as
- Urn is saved/destroyed, become a pilgrim place/remain a myth
- Kathyn may marry Teagan/not marry Teagan, Bevin may become a popular guy
- Redcliff may become popular/not popular
- other things too many to write

A few points I differ with.  Yes, I agree, the end of DA2 is one ending regardless.  I get the feeling BIoware intended to play out a story and we, the players, were just along to see how it played out to reach that conclusion (the circles overthrown, the world tossed into chaos) setting the stage for DA3.  It seems to play as an interim tale, and it does accomplish this goal rather well IMO.

As for DAO, you are recalling things in the game that don't happen.  The Cousland Male (or female for that matter) CANNOT rule alone, they must always have either Alistair or Anora as a spouse.  To rule alone isn't even an option to pick at the landsmeet!

Harrowmont does not "lead the dwarves to their doom".  He dies not long after taking the throne before he can do much of any good or ill, and the Assembly is thrown into the same chaos as any power vacuum would cause.  Bhelen does not "Lead the dwarves to glory".  He neither ends the darkspawn threat or does much for the casteless (turning them into cannon fodder against the darkspawn isn't my idea of 'leading them to glory').  He becomes a ruthless dicatator who abolishes the Assembly so he can rule alone.  What happens after he dies?  With no Assembly to even make a stab at governing the city, however ineffectual it seems to be, it's just thrown into chaos again as the dwarves scrabble for power, which they will do.  Ultimately the same end happens regardless of which man you pick to rule after: the dwarves still scrabble for power/the throne regardless of any outcome chosen, the timeline is just different.

And there is only one ending for DAO.  The archdemon is slain.  Either the warden, Alistair or Loghain may die doing it or we get Morrigan's ritual creating the OGB, but still the archdemon is slain.  Any other control you may think you have over the outcome of the game is illusion.

We have all seen how epilogue slides, regardless of what they say aren't gospel (Cullen obviously doesn't go batsh*t insane and start killing mages willy nilly, nor does Anders remain with the wardens for the rest of his life), so I would take anything written in any epilogue slide with a grain of salt.

Modifié par sylvanaerie, 04 septembre 2012 - 11:21 .

[sylvanaerie]

Nizaris1 wrote...

No, killing Archdemon is the part of the story, we MUST kill Archdemon, it is NOT the ending

The ending is the outcomes of all our decisions. And it is multiple things.

In DA2 there is no such thing. You MUST kill Orsino and Meredith, the outcome only 2 things, become a hero of Templar or Mages. thats all.

Sorry but killing the Archdemon is the story.  Anything else is just fluff and filler.  I could go through and start arguing and nitpicking over every little decision in DA2 as well but I don't want my posts to become long thesis.

Modifié par sylvanaerie, 04 septembre 2012 - 11:13 .

[sylvanaerie]

Nizaris1 wrote...

yes, that is what i mean, killing the Archdemon is the story, but not the ending. The same like killing orsino and Meredith. All these villains MUST be killed by the hero. So the ending is what?

The ending of DA2 is "the world is thrown into chaos as (much needed) change comes".  The ending of DAO is "the blight is stopped".  Any other choices made in either game is just filler.

[Spicen]

sylvanaerie wrote...

Nizaris1 wrote...

yes, that is what i mean, killing the Archdemon is the story, but not the ending. The same like killing orsino and Meredith. All these villains MUST be killed by the hero. So the ending is what?

The ending of DA2 is "the world is thrown into chaos as (much needed) change comes".  The ending of DAO is "the blight is stopped".  Any other choices made in either game is just filler.

I have to say we had no choice in DA 2 ending. But plenty in DAO(not that BW will really give a damn though).

[sylvanaerie]

Nizaris1 wrote...

Need me to be specific...? I give an example

In DA:O

The Archdemon is slain....

- so Lady Cousland live as a Queen, the land is united, the Dalish have a land, the dwarves have a great future, the Mages are as well as they are....
- so Lady Couslnd live as a Queen, but the land is in tremor, werewolves becomes wild attacking humans, dwarves fall into bad politic again, Templars become ruthless killing mages...
- so Lady Cousland decide to go for an adventure, the land is peaceful, the dalish have good relationship with human under new Keeper, and so and so and so.......

That is and example of multiple endings...what we called THE END

You are missing my point entirely.  Those aren't 'endings' those are illusions, fluff, filler.  Ultimately, the Blight is ALWAYS stopped every game.  That is the ONLY consistent thing throughout. 

In DA2
 
you can quell the mage rebellion (Side templars) and rule Kirkwall
You can side mages and support their rebellion against templar rule
You can wipe out Merrill's dalish clan (or pick a choice to not fight them)
You can get Merrill to smash her mirror on the rivalry path
you can get Anders to admit he's lost all control of Vengeance on the rivalry path
You can send Feynriel to the Dalish or send him to the Circle
You can help Aveline become captain of Kirkwall or not.
You can duel the Arishok or you can turn Isabela over to the Qunari.

I could go on and on but you see?  Regardless of what decisions you make in either game, the ending is the same.  The blight is stopped in Origins and the mage/templar war happens anyway. 
Any other 'endings' you want to argue are just 'fluff'.

[sylvanaerie]

Nizaris1 wrote...

You can wipe out Merrill's dalish clan (or pick a choice to not fight them)
You can get Merrill to smash her mirror on the rivalry path
you can get Anders to admit he's lost all control of Vengeance on the rivalry path
You can send Feynriel to the Dalish or send him to the Circle
You can help Aveline become captain of Kirkwall or not.

These are not endings

nor is Queen Cousland, City elf bann or free circles.  Those aren't endings, those are just results of choices you made in game (that have little to no impact on the actual ending--which is quelling the blight). 

Your warden can be a complete and utter bastard, backstabbing everyone they meet, feeding his fellow warden (Loghain or Alistair) to the Archdemon, killing multiple companions, npcs etc. in the name of power (or whatever motives he has).

Or you can play the Paladin path, doing much good for Ferelden, Orzammar and the Dalish peoples. 

Archdemon still dies, same ending, different journey. 

You are confusing the journey and your personal choices in game with actual endings.  This is not true.  The only ending is the consistent thing that ties all your choices together.  Granted those aren't 'endings' I posted for DA2 either.  That was my point.  Queen Cousland isn't an ending because ultimately she disappears (as does every other Hero of Ferelden regardless of their origin, regardless of your choices) at the end of DA2. So in the 'end' she suffers the same fate every other surviving Hero of Ferelden does, regardless of your choices/journey.  The only difference between the Warden and Hawke is most of Hawke's 'choices' don't have world impacting results, just personal ones.  Certainly Anders admitting he's lost out to the demon isn't a world impacting thing, but it's certainly his ending because that's when I whip out the murder knife.  (And it may be argued that his ending is world impacting what with the bomb and all, but that still happens regardless of what you do or say or what path he's on.  He just admits he's out of control when rivaled).  And Hawke doesn't get any epilogue slides tying up neatly all his/her choices in the game like the Warden, thus furthering the illusion of the player having more control in DAO.

Regardless of which path you choose, which choices you make, the only ending that matters is the archdemon is slain. You cannot reach the end of the game without that one fact.  Just as the only ending that matters in DA2 is the mage/templar war is sparked.  That could have been achieved even without killing Orsino and Meredith, Bioware could have found any number of ways to reach it, they just felt that those two boss fights were necessary to the tale.

If you were to argue DAO had some alternate ending, the only one I would consider an actual alternate ending would be 'you side with the archdemon and the darkspawn', because that alters the ending in an impactful way rather than the 'filler' you are you are positing as endings.

Most of the choices made in DAO aren't consistant with DA2 either.  Freed circle?  Umm hardly.  Cullen gone batsh*t insane...didn't happen.  Queen Cousland or a King's Mistress are mentioned a couple times in DA2, otherwise of little to no impact.  Werewolves cured?  One small encounter in DA2.  Bhelen on the throne, another small side quest of little consequence.  (BTW I don't think either Bhelen or Harrowmont are good choices since the ultimate result is more chaos for Orzammar, just the timeline is different).  Anders turned over to the Circle instead of conscripted...guess what, that choice was tossed out the window in favor of story too.  If these were truly 'endings' then they would have more of an impact on the world at large than as just filler to tie up all the loose ends of the story, and half the time they aren't consistent with what's continued in the 'history of Thedas' we, as players, are experiencing.

Bioware is going to tell the story they want, epilogue slides should always be taken with a grain of salt.

Ultimately the only thing that impacts DA2 (and the rest of Thedas) is stopping the blight.  That is the story of DAO, the only 'choice' you could have was to kill the archdemon, you can't alter that and choose to side with the darkspawn. At least in DA2 you get to choose to support one side or the other, but the ending is still the same.  Outside of Fereldan's themselves, no one cares who's butt sits on the throne (they are just as happy with Anora or Alistair) or whether the Dalish still squabble with humans or not (which BTW they always get their land, the only thing that changes is without Zathrian, Lanaya actually makes some headway in establishing good relations, again, your choices make little impact of consequence there).

The only codex you find in regards to DAO are two (that I've been able to find).  One that talks about the warden uniting the different treaties along with Arl Eamon and fighting the Blight, and other which mentions the Blight is quelled in only a year.  None of that other stuff matters because it isn't an ending, it's just filler to the story.  The fact that it comes at the end and ties the ending all neatly up in a bow doesn't make it an 'ending', it's just filler to the actual ending which is stopping the Blight.  If it were that vital to the story, all a player's choices would be consistant throughout all Origin games, and the only consistency is 'the blight is stopped'. 

And Bioware has said not even the OGB is considered "canon".  The only 'canon' seems to be "Blight is stopped" and "Mage/templar war is sparked".

Modifié par sylvanaerie, 04 septembre 2012 - 01:20 .

[sylvanaerie]

BTW I keep emphasizing "Stopping the Blight" is the ending because I don't mean simply the final boss fight (in which the archdemon is killed) is the ending. When i say 'the archdemon is killed' is just a euphamism for "Stopping the Blight" I just get tired of repeating the same phrase over and over, since killing the Archdemon ends the Blight.

I am not confusing a boss fight with 'the ending'.

[Renmiri1]

EntropicAngel wrote...

I think they're simply ignorant, Wood. Not "intellectually dishonest," per se.

Why the Ad Hominem ?

I didn't want to go into a long treaty of all the redeeming qualities of Loghain when my point was not related to Loghain's history.

My point is that the ending decision in DA2 has only 2 factions but is a lot more nuanced than deciding between Alistair and Loghain or deciding between Dwarven kings. And deciding to kill darkspawn is not morally ambiguous. Deciding to kill templars or mages is.

Save the insults to people who insult you. This isn't a high school playground where the bully gets to win. 

Modifié par Renmiri1, 04 septembre 2012 - 01:29 .

[philippe willaume]

sylvanaerie wrote...

BTW I keep emphasizing "Stopping the Blight" is the ending because I don't mean simply the final boss fight (in which the archdemon is killed) is the ending. When i say 'the archdemon is killed' is just a euphamism for "Stopping the Blight" I just get tired of repeating the same phrase over and over, since killing the Archdemon ends the Blight.

I am not confusing a boss fight with 'the ending'.

Hello no you are not and I  think the point you are making is very valid. 

What DA:0  deos and DA:2 do not is puting all the stories arc into a context  relevant to the player.
what DA:2  ening is missing is that it need to be presented and contextualised as DA:2 ACT II was.

Phil