82 réponses à ce sujet

[Wulfram]

hhh89 wrote...

Regardless, I think that DA2's story concept is the rise of power during years of a man in a city full of internal and external conflicts. On that, I find the concept more interesting than DAO's.

That was a deeply flawed concept for a story in which the main character was undefined, and thus may not actually want to rise to power or take any actions to achieve it.

Which is probably why the supposed "rise to power" basically consisted of one action - defeating the Arishok - with no real actions related to it either before or after.

[The Elder King]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

They wanted to tell mage-templar in the opening screen but they also wanted to tell the story about how a supposedly common man rise to power and become the the champion of Kirkwall who hardly relevance to the conflict other than a misfortune guy who get caught at the right time and place in any given disjointed 3 ACTs. So yes, it's a ****** poor storytelling employing a ****** poor executed unreliable third person narrator story-within-story frame narrative.

I'm sorry I'm not impressed with DA 2 story. I've read and watch too many personal and rise to power themed stories that are far better than DA 2, I couldn't bother to compare DA 2 with them.

I never said that DA2's story is good. Both the storytelling and execution weren't good (and in Act 3 they were terrible). I said that the concept is something I like more than DAO's concept. At the end, I enjoyed DAO's story more, because it was better executed.

[StElmo]

Wulfram wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

Regardless, I think that DA2's story concept is the rise of power during years of a man in a city full of internal and external conflicts. On that, I find the concept more interesting than DAO's.

That was a deeply flawed concept for a story in which the main character was undefined, and thus may not actually want to rise to power or take any actions to achieve it.

There always must be limitations to how undefined a character was. What if the warden never wanted to fight darkspawn? The argument isn't sound.

[JimboGee]

Yeah, thanks Robert, or should I say captain obvious, I think the DA writers have it from here....

[The Elder King]

Wulfram wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

Regardless, I think that DA2's story concept is the rise of power during years of a man in a city full of internal and external conflicts. On that, I find the concept more interesting than DAO's.

That was a deeply flawed concept for a story in which the main character was undefined, and thus may not actually want to rise to power or take any actions to achieve it.

Which is probably why the supposed "rise to power" basically consisted of one action - defeating the Arishok - with no real actions related to it either before or after.

The concept in DAO's story is that the MC has to became a Warden and stop the Blight. The MC might not actually want to become a Warden and stop the Blight. The plot generally forces the MC to do something (unless we're on a Bethesda game, where you can ignore the main plot for hundreds of hours).
About the "rise of power" related only to one action, that's an execution's problem. I certainly wasn't expect that the rise of power was related only to the Arishok.

[Wulfram]

The main character usually is forced to do something, but they're usually put into a situation where any number of motivations can serve as reason for them doing it.

The "Rise to Power" concept never actually made it into the game because it was inherently flawed as a central concept without a defined protagonist with established motivations.  The flaws in execution are a consequence of the flaw in concept

Modifié par Wulfram, 02 décembre 2012 - 11:46 .

[The Elder King]

Wulfram wrote...

The main character usually is forced to do something, but they're usually put into a situation where any number of motivations can serve as reason for them doing it.

The "Rise to Power" concept never actually made it into the game because it was inherently flawed as a central concept without a defined protagonist with established motivations.

The fact that they didn't create motivations for the MC to want to "rise to power" is an execution's problem, not a concept one.
Regardless, even if it wasn't for the Champion title, my Hawke had motivations for regaining the noble status (which is a step on the rise to power) and gold in the DR expedictions. It was for protecting Bethany from the templars.

[esper]

StElmo wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

Regardless, I think that DA2's story concept is the rise of power during years of a man in a city full of internal and external conflicts. On that, I find the concept more interesting than DAO's.

That was a deeply flawed concept for a story in which the main character was undefined, and thus may not actually want to rise to power or take any actions to achieve it.

There always must be limitations to how undefined a character was. What if the warden never wanted to fight darkspawn? The argument isn't sound.

Or to make it seem less foolish. What if the warden wanted to flee to Orlais because there was where the nearest other warden was and depending on origin the warden does not automatically love fereldan.

[Maria Caliban]

StElmo wrote...

Formula is not the word. Principles. and these principles have been around since before the common era.

Principles are malleable - forumla is like chemistry, which film or any other form of story is not.

Yes, formula.

What most people call the principles of storytelling are bunk. They're either a bunch of expectations based on culture, genre, and medium, or they're so vague that they won't actually help you write a story at all.

While I'm at it, the hero's journey is a descriptive anthropological text, not a writing guide.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 02 décembre 2012 - 11:50 .

[Maria Caliban]

StElmo wrote...

www.youtube.com/watch

^ Amazing video above. Hope this advice is taken

Right -- this is a video on *dialogue.*

Here's a mistake he says to avoid:

4. Ostentation: Writers using flowery language, often with very artistic pretensions. In other words, the writer is working too hard on trying to be an artist.

This isn't an error in dialogue. It's an error in narration. If you have an ostentatious character, then ostentatious language is appropriate. If you have mostly ostentatious characters, then having mostly ostentatious dialogue is appropriate.

Why is it shoe-horned into a video about dialogue problems? Especially when each tip is about two to three sentences long?

Because 80% of 'writing guides' out there will belabor the idea that a writer shouldn't be interested in style. It's regurgitated endlessly until a large number of people take it as self-evident. Of course, those people then rail at academia/the literati when people who 'work hard at being an artist' manage to get published.

Honestly,it's a fine idea of you're a scriptwriter, but it's a questionable one for a novelist, a bad one for a short story writer, and a horrible one for a poet.

Because, you know, different types of writing demand different things of the writer.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 02 décembre 2012 - 12:12 .

[Wulfram]

hhh89 wrote...

The fact that they didn't create motivations for the MC to want to "rise to power" is an execution's problem, not a concept one.

If you define "concept" so narrowly, then it becomes meaningless because everything becomes "execution".  You can't just take a generic concept - that's actually present in virtually every Bioware game ever - strip it of all context and reality, turn it into some platonic ideal of a plot and proclaim it perfect.

Regardless, even if it wasn't for the Champion title, my Hawke had motivations for regaining the noble status (which is a step on the rise to power) and gold in the DR expedictions. It was for protecting Bethany from the templars.

Which makes no sense - let's protect ourselves from the Templars by using lots of magic and becoming a public figure! - and doesn't rise Hawke to power, anyway.  Just gets them a nicer house.

[esper]

Wulfram wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

The fact that they didn't create motivations for the MC to want to "rise to power" is an execution's problem, not a concept one.

If you define "concept" so narrowly, then it becomes meaningless because everything becomes "execution".  You can't just take a generic concept - that's actually present in virtually every Bioware game ever - strip it of all context and reality, turn it into some platonic ideal of a plot and proclaim it perfect.

Regardless, even if it wasn't for the Champion title, my Hawke had motivations for regaining the noble status (which is a step on the rise to power) and gold in the DR expedictions. It was for protecting Bethany from the templars.

Which makes no sense - let's protect ourselves from the Templars by using lots of magic and becoming a public figure! - and doesn't rise Hawke to power, anyway.  Just gets them a nicer house.

Its for bribing. They says so. And a nicer house is a very good reason when living with Gamlen in a house that is far too small for four people.

Anway for my Hawke it was to get Leandra and Carver back into to nobility, then my Hawke planned to return to Fereldan, but then stuff happened with Carver and Hawke couldn't leave Leandra alone and by act 2 she has simply found enough friends to not want to move.

Modifié par esper, 02 décembre 2012 - 12:17 .

[The Elder King]

Wulfram wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

The fact that they didn't create motivations for the MC to want to "rise to power" is an execution's problem, not a concept one.

If you define "concept" so narrowly, then it becomes meaningless because everything becomes "execution".  You can't just take a generic concept - that's actually present in virtually every Bioware game ever - strip it of all context and reality, turn it into some platonic ideal of a plot and proclaim it perfect.

I'd like if you can point out where I said that it's a perfect concept, or even a good concept. I said that it's better then DAO's concept, in my opinion. The vague, narrow concept of DAO is joining an ancient order and fight the horde of evil. I prefer the DA2 vague and a narrow concept. But I never said it was the greatest concept ever, of the perfect concept. Saying that it's better than DAO's concept =/= great concept. And in the end I preferred DAO's story, because it had better storytelling and was executed better.
Considering anyway that I did find motivations for Hawke's rise to power, than it's a subjective topic. You didn't find them or think they're not good or plausible. I find them plausible.

Regardless, even if it wasn't for the Champion title, my Hawke had motivations for regaining the noble status (which is a step on the rise to power) and gold in the DR expedictions. It was for protecting Bethany from the templars.

Which makes no sense - let's protect ourselves from the Templars by using lots of magic and becoming a public figure! - and doesn't rise Hawke to power, anyway.  Just gets them a nicer house.

What "lot" of magic are you referring to?
Anyway, mage Hawke in Act 2 (before becoming the Champion, so almost impossible to touch) wasn't bothered by the templars. Either his noble status, his prestige or his richness prevented the templars to touch him, so for a warrior Hawke it was a plausible plan to use the nobiliy's power and the richness from the DR expediction to protect Bethany from the templars.
I never said that regaining noble status finished the "rise to power". It's a step. Unless you're sayng that there's not differencies between being a commoner or a noble. Teh Viscount asked you to talk with the Arishok not only because you know him, but because your prestige was greatly increased between Act 1 and Act 2. If Hawke was still a commoner at the start of Act 2, I doubt that the Viscount would've asked you to talk with the Arishok.
Regardless, the fact that we only got a better house for becoming noble it's, again an execution problem. Or are you saying that having a better house is the only thing that Bioware could've done?

Modifié par hhh89, 02 décembre 2012 - 12:37 .

[Wulfram]

My point isn't that Hawke isn't doing things without adequate motivation - that is an issue, but it's not this issue

It's that because they don't necessarily have any particular ambition, their "rise to power" is simply a matter of circumstance rather than the product of much that they actually do.  And the failure to realise that for such a story to work, it would require that the protagonist be a particular type of person is a failure of concept, not execution.

[Wulfram]

hhh89 wrote...

I'd like if you can point out where I said that it's a perfect concept, or even a good concept. I said that it's better then DAO's concept, in my opinion. The vague, narrow concept of DAO is joining an ancient order and fight the horde of evil. I prefer the DA2 vague and a narrow concept. But I never said it was the greatest concept ever, of the perfect concept.

It's seems to me that your definition of what the concept of the game is allows you to define virtually anything as the concept, and thus declaring that one is superior to the other is rather pointless.

The way you're using it, you could easily define DA:O's concept as the story of a man rising to power in a kingdom riven by internal and external conflicts.

[The Elder King]

Wulfram wrote...

My point isn't that Hawke isn't doing things without adequate motivation - that is an issue, but it's not this issue

It's that because they don't necessarily have any particular ambition, their "rise to power" is simply a matter of circumstance rather than the product of much that they actually do.  And the failure to realise that for such a story to work, it would require that the protagonist be a particular type of person is a failure of concept, not execution.

But neither the Warden had necessarily the ambition of stopping the Blight of becoming a Warden. He coud not care about his family, friend, people and country, and not have any ambition. Both games forced the MC on doing something they might not wanto do, without giving a necessary ambition.
Both the Warden and Hawke reached their goal (stopping the Blight, "rise to power"). If I understand what you're saying, the differencies is that the Warden's success is based on what he did, and Hawke's success is based on the circumstances.
Other than the fact that Hawke became the Champion because he did something, stopping the qunari, even if you're right, how the problem isn't the execution? DA2 could've had Hawke becoming the Champion in a different manner, not only because of the qunari invasion.

Modifié par hhh89, 02 décembre 2012 - 01:17 .

[StElmo]

JimboGee wrote...

Yeah, thanks Robert, or should I say captain obvious, I think the DA writers have it from here....

disrespectful and all bioware games have too much exposition without subtext, so no, they have not "got it from here". They need less exposition without subtext for one.

That said DA2 is the best so far, so it can only get better David Gaider seems like a cool lead writer.

Modifié par StElmo, 02 décembre 2012 - 02:15 .

[Wulfram]

hhh89 wrote...

But neither the Warden had necessarily the ambition of stopping the Blight of becoming a Warden. He coud not care about his family, friend, people and country, and not have any ambition. Both games forced the MC on doing something they might not wanto do, without giving a necessary ambition.

The Warden was forced to accept a goal of stopping the blight early on.  Hawke never accepts the goal of rising to power.  They never actually do anything to rise to power

Wanting to stop the blight is a reasonable thing for any protagonist of a heroic fantasy game - if the character is the sort whose response to a bunch of monsters turning up is to run, that's the fault of the player.  But wanting power is not something that can be assumed of a heroic fantasy protagonist.

Both the Warden and Hawke reached their goal (stopping the Blight, "rise to power"). If I understand what you're saying, the differencies is that the Warden's success is based on what he did, and Hawke's success is based on the circumstances.
Other than the fact that Hawke became the Champion because he did something, stopping the qunari, even if you're right, how the problem isn't the execution? DA2 could've had Hawke becoming the Champion in a different manner, not only because of the qunari invasion.

Hawke gains power because he stops the Qunari, but he doesn't stop the Qunari to gain power.  So rising to power is not Hawke's goal, that they achieve, it's something that they stumble upon.

They could have had Hawke rise in a different way, but unless they're prepared to define Hawke as wanting power and taking action to achieve it, it's always going to be based on an accident of circumstance and won't be compelling as a central concept to the story.  Changing Hawke to a character who desires power rather than one who stumbles into it accidentally would be a change of concept.

[StElmo]

Maria Caliban wrote...

StElmo wrote...

Formula is not the word. Principles. and these principles have been around since before the common era.

Principles are malleable - forumla is like chemistry, which film or any other form of story is not.

Yes, formula.

What most people call the principles of storytelling are bunk. They're either a bunch of expectations based on culture, genre, and medium, or they're so vague that they won't actually help you write a story at all.

While I'm at it, the hero's journey is a descriptive anthropological text, not a writing guide.

Writing is a craft not "anything goes" - sure, followig structure to a tee without any artistic cohesion, well of course that isn't going to be great. But "anything goes" is the most amatuerish mistake you would make as a writer.

[JimboGee]

StElmo wrote...

JimboGee wrote...

Yeah, thanks Robert, or should I say captain obvious, I think the DA writers have it from here....

disrespectful and all bioware games have too much exposition without subtext, so no, they have not "got it from here". They need less exposition without subtext for one.

That said DA2 is the best so far, so it can only get better David Gaider seems like a cool lead writer.

The people who wrote the previous games didn't fall into the job by accident. this is what they do and they do it well if you ask me. This guy may as well have said "Don't **** it up" 10 times. This video should be sent to Bethesda. Maybe they might learn something.

[frostajulie]

There really was nothing impressive about DA2. It was a fun game but better than origins? Not even close as cliched as the story is in DAO it was presented better, felt more alive and engaging and fluid and the illusion of choice was crafted so masterfully that whatever it supposedly lacked in originality was easily brushed aside. Cliched or not DA2 never comes remotely close to being better than DAO in any way. Of course thats my opinion and I do enjoy DA2 but better than DAO no. Never. That game was a 3 year vacation from reality for me. DA2 lasted 3 Hawkes before it got boring.

[In Exile]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

They wanted to tell the mage-templar war in the opening screen but they also wanted to tell the story about how a supposedly common man rise to power and become the champion of Kirkwall ( by accident ) who hardly relevance to the conflict other than a misfortune guy who get caught at the right time and place in any given disjointed 3 ACTs. So yes, it's a ****** poor storytelling employing a ****** poor executed unreliable third person narrator story-within-story frame narrative.

No, you're completely wrong.

They wanted to tell the story about Hawke, who was believed to have conspired to start the Mage-Templar war with a series of anti-Chantry operatives from Ferelden (Isabella, Anders, Aveline, and I suppose Merril), by planning to steal the red lyrium, inciting the Qunari to rise up at kill the VIscount, and then planning to bomb the Chantry.

The actual plot of the game was how Hawke did none of these things, and instead really was just at the wrong place and at the wrong time, and was much more of a passenger than an active agent of change, unlike what Cassandra believed.

The acts are all related, becasue from Cassandra's POV they're all a scheme, but from Hawke's POV they were just unrelated experiences that led to wrong-place, wrong-time.

I'm sorry I'm not impressed with DA 2 story. I've read and watch too many personal and rise to power themed stories that are far better than DA 2, I couldn't bother to compare DA 2 with them.

Except it isn't a personal rise to power. But Bioware's garbage marketing made everyone thing it was supposed to be, which is one of the many reasons DA2 just did not come across well.

[In Exile]

Wulfram wrote...

The main character usually is forced to do something, but they're usually put into a situation where any number of motivations can serve as reason for them doing it.

The "Rise to Power" concept never actually made it into the game because it was inherently flawed as a central concept without a defined protagonist with established motivations.  The flaws in execution are a consequence of the flaw in concept

Because, as I said above, it's not about a "rise to power" . But that's what they marketed it as - because, here's a story about a pesant who happens to be become revilved for starting a war by always being in the wrong place, find out the truth! was apparently not an attractive market proposition.

[In Exile]

Wulfram wrote...
The Warden was forced to accept a goal of stopping the blight early on.

No, he wasn't. At best, the Warden was forced to accept Flemeth's scheme, but you could just say that this is lying. The game's just obviously designed to go along with stopping the Blight in Ferelden, but there's nothing to actually stop the Warden in-game from just abandoning Ferelden at Lothering.

Wanting to stop the blight is a reasonable thing for any protagonist of a heroic fantasy game - if the character is the sort whose response to a bunch of monsters turning up is to run, that's the fault of the player.  But wanting power is not something that can be assumed of a heroic fantasy protagonist.

What if the character wants to stop the blight but - like Duncan - is pragmatic and thinks Ferelden is a lost cause? Then you're told to go F yourself, because you don't just want to stop the blight; you want to stop the Blight and save Ferelden, and there is no reason that would be your justification at all.

The game assumes lots of things: that you identify witht the GW and want to stop the blight as a member of their order, that you want to save Ferelden and believe you can save it, that you don't think Riordan is an insane loon for thinking 3 lone GWs can stop an archdemon instead of retreating right there....

The game is made for I <3 Ferelden and I <3 Warden characters, full-stop.

[The Elder King]

Wulfram wrote...



The Warden was forced to accept a goal of stopping the blight early on.  Hawke never accepts the goal of rising to power.  They never actually do anything to rise to power

Wanting to stop the blight is a reasonable thing for any protagonist of a heroic fantasy game - if the character is the sort whose response to a bunch of monsters turning up is to run, that's the fault of the player.  But wanting power is not something that can be assumed of a heroic fantasy protagonist.

Rising to power isn't something you can "accept". It's something
that you might want to do. In the first Act, Hawke wants to improve his
situation, and becoming a noble. It's a step in "risng to power" and
Hawke decides to regain the noble status. Becoming the Champion isn't
something you can decide to purse. It's a title that its given if a
person does something exceptional.
I don't understand what's the point of stopping the blight being assumed for a HF game and rising to power not. I don't see the relevance for the discussion. Since it's a fantasy game, it should have a "stop the evil, became the hero" story?

Hawke gains power because he stops the Qunari, but he doesn't stop the Qunari to gain power.  So rising to power is not Hawke's goal, that they achieve, it's something that they stumble upon.

They could have had Hawke rise in a different way, but unless they're prepared to define Hawke as wanting power and taking action to achieve it, it's always going to be based on an accident of circumstance and won't be compelling as a central concept to the story.  Changing Hawke to a character who desires power rather than one who stumbles into it accidentally would be a change of concept.

Depending on how to roleplay. Hawke might have accpeted the job from the Viscount to achieve more power.
As I said, my definition of a story's concept is different from yours. If I'm going to think about your view, then I can somehow agree with you.