116 réponses à ce sujet

[Wullo]

Pandaman102 wrote...

Oh, and I have NO IDEA what's a dating sim is 

Not sure if serious...

I am absolutely serious! I did not know that it's some kind of common knowledge required to participate on the BSN. I will just shut up now..

[SpunkyMonkey]

Wullo wrote...

SpunkyMonkey wrote...


I genuinely hated DA:2 - but not because of the differences themselves, but because the differences made the game worse IMO.

So basically what you mean is that you hated DAII coz it was different than Origins..

Nope, as a stand alone game I hated it.

Analysed as a stand-alone game I picked the things out from it which I didn't like and, after forming an opinion of DA:2 based on that alone, compared them with DA:O to see how many of those elements were present there.

Very few were, but had they been different and improved instead I wouldn't have listed them as flaws in the first place, regardless of whether they were present in DA:O or not.

In fact I purposely stayed away from any news, previews or anything about DA:2 so that I could experience it as virginially as possible. There were no preconceptions, no pre-detirmined opnions, just an eager dude wanting to play a great game and being served up a steamer instead.

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 06 décembre 2012 - 12:44 .

[Pandaman102]

Wullo wrote...

And just to try to be a bit on-topic.. about that article.
I could see the author's side right until she mentions the "bwaah, every companion is bisexual, it's stupid" Why is it such a big deal? I see this brought up as a negative of DAII every.friggin.time on other gaming sites.. I've always assumed most of the complainers are hetero males whose masculinity is threatened because a pixel-guy just hit on their pixel-dude in a video game...

But since then I've read opinions on this here on the BSN and it looks like some ppl hate it for some other reason? (and the author of this particular article is also female) I just don't know what that reason could be?

Anders said it best:
"I've always believed people fall in love with a whole person, not just a body. Why would you shy away from loving someone just because they're like you?"
Hawke is just awesome, everyone  Hawke.

(I'm not trying to start the bisexual-or-not topic again, I.. I just.. ok, honestly I just really wanted to post that Anders quote..  )

I can't speak for everyone, but while not personally against it, I do see it as another divide between game mechanics and story mechanics that hinders immersion (and the sense your choices matter). If you choose to be a mage you have no choice but to watch Bethany die, or if you choose to be a warrior or rogue Carver has to do, you don't get a choice; however choosing to be male or female has absolutely no bearing on who is available (or even if the difficulty to romance people changes), much like how if you choose to be a Blood Mage and repeatedly stab yourself in the chest in front of Meredith she doesn't give a damn (I've seen people try to handwave this as Hawke being special or whatever, but let's be honest: it's a design decision, not a story one).

It doesn't really bother me though, because at the very least I have to option not to get too friendly with characters I don't want to romance. If all the companions ganged up on Hawke for a, er, "surprise" orgy then that would be a different matter altogether.

[Pandaman102]

Wullo wrote...

I am absolutely serious! I did not know that it's some kind of common knowledge required to participate on the BSN. I will just shut up now..

Oh, my bad, dating sims are a genre of Japanese games where all you basically do is travel between the same locations, meeting and interacting with a small group of characters, and you pick the right dialogue decisions to try to get into one (or several) of their pants/skirts. Typically very story driven, a lot are just straight up pornography while others are like digital Choose Your Own Adventure novels, but strictly about relationships rather than any actual adventure (and being text based actualy have more player agency than CRPGs these days).

[Wullo]

Pandaman102 wrote...

I can't speak for everyone, but while not personally against it, I do see it as another divide between game mechanics and story mechanics that hinders immersion (and the sense your choices matter). If you choose to be a mage you have no choice but to watch Bethany die, or if you choose to be a warrior or rogue Carver has to do, you don't get a choice; however choosing to be male or female has absolutely no bearing on who is available (or even if the difficulty to romance people changes), much like how if you choose to be a Blood Mage and repeatedly stab yourself in the chest in front of Meredith she doesn't give a damn (I've seen people try to handwave this as Hawke being special or whatever, but let's be honest: it's a design decision, not a story one).

Ah, I see. That's.. somewhat understandable, tho not as much in relation to Origins as maybe to some other rpgs or (the perfect rpg game in ppl's head?) Because Origins did not have that much varied dialogue based on your race/sex either. A dalish elf could not say to Lanaya when asked about what cities are like that 'I have not seen any either'. (one thing that i recently experienced and got annoyed by)

I would have to say Origins surely has a larger amount of sex-specific dialogue (and I mean sex as male/female ) but not significantly more. DAII dialogue had variations based on it too, even in romances.

Tho it's hard to see how fewer choices increase immersion..

Pandaman102 wrote...

It doesn't really bother me though, because at the very least I have to option not to get too friendly with characters I don't want to romance. If all the companions ganged up on Hawke for a, er, "surprise" orgy then that would be a different matter altogether.

Well, that would be certainly an.. interesting take on the romances 

[Wullo]

Pandaman102 wrote...

Wullo wrote...

I am absolutely serious! I did not know that it's some kind of common knowledge required to participate on the BSN. I will just shut up now..

Oh, my bad, dating sims are a genre of Japanese games where all you basically do is travel between the same locations, meeting and interacting with a small group of characters, and you pick the right dialogue decisions to try to get into one (or several) of their pants/skirts. Typically very story driven, a lot are just straight up pornography while others are like digital Choose Your Own Adventure novels, but strictly about relationships rather than any actual adventure (and being text based actualy have more player agency than CRPGs these days).

Never knew such thing existed.. Umm.. you learn something new everyday, right?

[Pandaman102]

Wullo wrote...

Never knew such thing existed.. Umm.. you learn something new everyday, right?

Don't look too deeply into it, it will take many years of soul-hardening before you are prepared to look into the maw of madness. The uninitiated mind rarely survives the process and I suspect it might be the Taint the Wardens talk about.

And I say this as a fan of Japanese entertainment.

[Kidd]

Wullo wrote...

Oh, and I have NO IDEA what's a dating sim is 

It's short for "dating simulator," a game where the entire narrative is focused on the idea that your character is single and wants to stop being single.

Most commonly you'll play a high school boy and get to know your classmates, trying to seduce one (some?) of your classmates, perhaps a teacher or some mature lady you met down at the mall. Some have multiple protagonists, some have a fixed love interest where the entire game focuses on getting just that one person, some have supernatural elements etc. It's all about human relations and finding love, however.

There's a pretty large niche market for these games in Japan where only some of the games with pornographic content (that tend to be worse written overall) get an English release. The games tend to be very looked down upon in the western hemisphere since we usually get the worst games, not to mention how easy it is to imagine the genre only holds interest to desperate singles in general.

(in other words, you want to play Japanese imports with fan translation patches if you touch any games in this genre most of the time, otherwise there's not much of interest to find)

Wullo wrote...

Anders said it best:
"I've always believed people fall in love with a whole person, not just a body. Why would you shy away from loving someone just because they're like you?"
Hawke is just awesome, everyone  Hawke.

While we're randomly quoting Anders,
"Ten years, a hundred years from now, someone like me will love someone like you. And there will be no templars to tear them apart."
The feels! Maker, if I wasn't on board with my character and Anders forcing a revolution until that point, I was with them forever ever since. Yeah they were pretty much creating a romantic moment out of systematically mass-murdering everyone of a specific profession, but some sacrifice must be made for justice and love, right?

... that moment when I don't know whether to put <3 or , that moment is right now...

[Wullo]

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

While we're randomly quoting Anders,
"Ten years, a hundred years from now, someone like me will love someone like you. And there will be no templars to tear them apart."
The feels! Maker, if I wasn't on board with my character and Anders forcing a revolution until that point, I was with them forever ever since. Yeah they were pretty much creating a romantic moment out of systematically mass-murdering everyone of a specific profession, but some sacrifice must be made for justice and love, right?

... that moment when I don't know whether to put <3 or , that moment is right now...

Haha, so true! Anders did somewhat mess up my moral compass..
That Anders quote.. <3

Khm.. maybe I should go to the Anders fan thread instead? 

Edit: And thanks for further clarification on 'dating sims'. I try not to judge anything without having experienced it myself, but I'm not sure I wanna delve into the subject xD

Modifié par Wullo, 06 décembre 2012 - 02:43 .

[Evil_Jashinist]

Fox In The Box wrote...

I'm not even going to touch on what she said about the bisexual love interests other than that I'd really like people to stop making assumptions of what bisexual people are like and how we relate to people of either gender.

THIS.

And I'M not even going to start making comparisons to me and my other bisexual friends to show just how bloody different we are and I mean ONLY when it comes to love and sex.  >>

Modifié par Evil_Jashinist, 06 décembre 2012 - 03:12 .

[TheDon81]

Article nailed it on almost everything, the comments nailed it on everything else.

[esper]

Pandaman102 wrote...

esper wrote...
You make zero lore changes in da:o expect maybe at the whole Orzommar quest. In fact you just enforce status quo which has been treathened by the arrival of the darkspawn. All the boons refuses to change the lore since a single King/Queen do not have the authority to change the status quo and if you read the epilogs all the changes alreayd there begins to reform back to status quo and in da2 it is made even more obvious..

Da2 blow the lore up by having the circles ruined.

Wait, wait, wait. DA2 destroying lore changes in DA:O is not DA:O's fault. It's DA2's fault. My argument about DA:O's lore changes are entirely about DA:O as a self-contained game. Much like how I'm not making the fallicious argument that DA2's choices might have different results but we don't know because DA3 hasn't come out it. It's not a trilogy, it was never intended to be a trilogy like Mass Effect, don't judge it like a trilogy.

That being said, the Dwarven Commoner Warden becomes Paragon - that's huge - and uplifts a bunch of people in Orzammar. That's not overturned in the epilogue; the Denerim Alienage not seeing better treatment in the epilogue is due to a bug (thanks for patching things, Bioware); the lands granted to the Dalish Warden's people aren't taken away (in Origins' epilogue, we're not talking about DA2's ignoring of choices); and... ugh, why don't you just look it up on the wiki?

I think I was being unclear here, and for that I am sorry. I was in a bad mood and did not defintehow I understand the words lore change.

A lore change is a change to the established lore (or perhaps the perspection off to it). In da:o the most of the lore changes revolves around Orzommar. No matter who ends up King I will grant that they will change Orzommar so that the current lore surronding Orzommar doesn't fit.

All of the rest of the choices in da:o only have to do with the conflicts that are more of less lore established. An Orzommar paragon is not a lore change, it is just another dwarven paragon and does not change the way dwarven paragons works. All off the boon backfires because Alistaïr and/or Anora vastely underestimates the lore. The Circle boon: The king queen sort of forgoet that they don't have juristriction of the circles when thye promise that, the city elf: Could have been, but the bann is murdered and I somehow doubt a new one is selected. The dalish elves, we are told in da2 that it went bad, my guess is they were killed, again because Alistair and/or Anora vastely underestimated the resentment between elves and humans.

As sad as it is the boons were simple too grand to be granted with words alone. Which in the light of hindsight we should have realized already when they were promised to the warden.

[esper]

Wullo wrote...

Pandaman102 wrote...

Wullo wrote...

I am absolutely serious! I did not know that it's some kind of common knowledge required to participate on the BSN. I will just shut up now..

Oh, my bad, dating sims are a genre of Japanese games where all you basically do is travel between the same locations, meeting and interacting with a small group of characters, and you pick the right dialogue decisions to try to get into one (or several) of their pants/skirts. Typically very story driven, a lot are just straight up pornography while others are like digital Choose Your Own Adventure novels, but strictly about relationships rather than any actual adventure (and being text based actualy have more player agency than CRPGs these days).

Never knew such thing existed.. Umm.. you learn something new everyday, right?

Actually they are not universally bad. The english market is expanding at the moment and some of them are story driven to the point were it present good stories and likeable characters. Some of them even have fun sims if you are into time mangement games and some of the visual novels types have a good story that just happens to double as a love story.

[Pandaman102]

esper wrote...

A lore change is a change to the established lore (or perhaps the perspection off to it). In da:o the most of the lore changes revolves around Orzommar. No matter who ends up King I will grant that they will change Orzommar so that the current lore surronding Orzommar doesn't fit.

Sorry, but I don't really understand why you think Orzammar is where most of the lore changes occur. There are decisions that stick and those that don't all over the game.

All of the rest of the choices in da:o only have to do with the conflicts that are more of less lore established. An Orzommar paragon is not a lore change, it is just another dwarven paragon and does not change the way dwarven paragons works.

It's been a while since I played, but I recall a living Paragon has a lot of influence over the dwarven Assembly. The creation of a new House and uplifting of low caste dwarves are never undone.

The Circle boon: The king queen sort of forgoet that they don't have juristriction of the circles when thye promise that,

Fair enough, the Chantry ignores the Ferelden decree. It would have been nice if Alistair or Anora could have ransomed the Ashes (assuming you didn't destroy it) for the rights over the Fereldan Circle, but it's reasonable because the Chantry doesn't owe the Warden any favors. Had the Warden saved the Chantry as well, then it would have been rather upsetting for them to just ignore that attempted change.

However if the Circle Mage Warden makes the ultimate sacrifice, Alistair/Anora does give the Chantry the middle finger, builds a new tower outside of Chantry control, and dedicates it to the Warden. That's a permanent lore change for Ferelden.

the city elf: Could have been, but the bann is murdered and I somehow doubt a new one is selected.

If the City Elf Warden makes the ultimate sacrifice, his/her uncle (I think it was the uncle) is named Bann, otherwise the Warden can become Bann or elect his/her friend to become Bann. This is an unpopular decision, but nothing says they're murdered or the decision is undone.

The dalish elves, we are told in da2 that it went bad, my guess is they were killed, again because Alistair and/or Anora vastely underestimated the resentment between elves and humans.

Like I said before, what DA2 did to ignore our decisions is not DA:O's failing. If DA3 came around and dismissed everything in DA2 as a dream of a drunken Alistair and never really happened, I wouldn't use that in an argument against DA2, I would use it against DA3.

That being said, nowhere in DA:O's epilogue states that the granting of lands to the Dalish were undone. Your choices regarding who leads one of the tribes will influence how poorly or well relations are maintained, but that's it. That decision granted the Dalish, who were traditionally forbidden land, a land to call their own. That's a lore change.

As sad as it is the boons were simple too grand to be granted with words alone. Which in the light of hindsight we should have realized already when they were promised to the warden.

There is no hindsight in DA:O though, that's purely a result of DA2's design throwing things out the window because it was too complex for Bioware to implement. When we finished DA:O, that was it - the story was done, all the changes we saw in the epilogue (and some of them we couldn't due to bugged flags) were permanent. It was possible for two different characters end with noticably different Fereldens, depending on decisions made.

For example one character can have a Ferelden where Redcliffe is virtually a ghost town, Orzammar has isolated itself from the rest of the world, Branca has isolated herself with her golem army, the Dalish are weaker by one tribe, the forest is still haunted by werewolves, two mage towers (one in Orzammar and one dedicated to the Warden) outside of the Chantry's control exists, Alistair is king, Morrigan carries the God Child, and the Warden is dead.

Another character can have a Ferelden where Redcliffe is restored to its former glory, Orzammar regains a number of thaigs with the help of the Ferelden army, there are no more new golesm, the Dalish have been granted land for the first time in generations, the forest is freed of werewolves, the Ferelden Circle is even more oppressive than before, Anora is queen, Morrigan doesn't have the God Child, and the Warden is alive.

And this doesn't even touch on what each of the companions wind up doing.

Now to be fair DA2 also has a handful of decisions that can make lore changes, such as if Merril's clan winds up being wiped out, if the Arishok dies, if the Qunari reclaim their book, where Feynriel winds up studying (I assume this is a lore change due to his unique power)... that's all I can think of at the moment. I have a nagging feeling I'm issing a couple, but it's still pretty limited.

Note I'm not mentioning changes to companions' personal lives because I didn't go into detail about DA:O's companions' epilogues.

[esper]

Pandaman102 wrote...

esper wrote...

A lore change is a change to the established lore (or perhaps the perspection off to it). In da:o the most of the lore changes revolves around Orzommar. No matter who ends up King I will grant that they will change Orzommar so that the current lore surronding Orzommar doesn't fit.

Sorry, but I don't really understand why you think Orzammar is where most of the lore changes occur. There are decisions that stick and those that don't all over the game.

All of the rest of the choices in da:o only have to do with the conflicts that are more of less lore established. An Orzommar paragon is not a lore change, it is just another dwarven paragon and does not change the way dwarven paragons works.

It's been a while since I played, but I recall a living Paragon has a lot of influence over the dwarven Assembly. The creation of a new House and uplifting of low caste dwarves are never undone.

The Circle boon: The king queen sort of forgoet that they don't have juristriction of the circles when thye promise that,

Fair enough, the Chantry ignores the Ferelden decree. It would have been nice if Alistair or Anora could have ransomed the Ashes (assuming you didn't destroy it) for the rights over the Fereldan Circle, but it's reasonable because the Chantry doesn't owe the Warden any favors. Had the Warden saved the Chantry as well, then it would have been rather upsetting for them to just ignore that attempted change.

However if the Circle Mage Warden makes the ultimate sacrifice, Alistair/Anora does give the Chantry the middle finger, builds a new tower outside of Chantry control, and dedicates it to the Warden. That's a permanent lore change for Ferelden.

the city elf: Could have been, but the bann is murdered and I somehow doubt a new one is selected.

If the City Elf Warden makes the ultimate sacrifice, his/her uncle (I think it was the uncle) is named Bann, otherwise the Warden can become Bann or elect his/her friend to become Bann. This is an unpopular decision, but nothing says they're murdered or the decision is undone.

The dalish elves, we are told in da2 that it went bad, my guess is they were killed, again because Alistair and/or Anora vastely underestimated the resentment between elves and humans.

Like I said before, what DA2 did to ignore our decisions is not DA:O's failing. If DA3 came around and dismissed everything in DA2 as a dream of a drunken Alistair and never really happened, I wouldn't use that in an argument against DA2, I would use it against DA3.

That being said, nowhere in DA:O's epilogue states that the granting of lands to the Dalish were undone. Your choices regarding who leads one of the tribes will influence how poorly or well relations are maintained, but that's it. That decision granted the Dalish, who were traditionally forbidden land, a land to call their own. That's a lore change.

As sad as it is the boons were simple too grand to be granted with words alone. Which in the light of hindsight we should have realized already when they were promised to the warden.

There is no hindsight in DA:O though, that's purely a result of DA2's design throwing things out the window because it was too complex for Bioware to implement. When we finished DA:O, that was it - the story was done, all the changes we saw in the epilogue (and some of them we couldn't due to bugged flags) were permanent. It was possible for two different characters end with noticably different Fereldens, depending on decisions made.

For example one character can have a Ferelden where Redcliffe is virtually a ghost town, Orzammar has isolated itself from the rest of the world, Branca has isolated herself with her golem army, the Dalish are weaker by one tribe, the forest is still haunted by werewolves, two mage towers (one in Orzammar and one dedicated to the Warden) outside of the Chantry's control exists, Alistair is king, Morrigan carries the God Child, and the Warden is dead.

Another character can have a Ferelden where Redcliffe is restored to its former glory, Orzammar regains a number of thaigs with the help of the Ferelden army, there are no more new golesm, the Dalish have been granted land for the first time in generations, the forest is freed of werewolves, the Ferelden Circle is even more oppressive than before, Anora is queen, Morrigan doesn't have the God Child, and the Warden is alive.

And this doesn't even touch on what each of the companions wind up doing.

Now to be fair DA2 also has a handful of decisions that can make lore changes, such as if Merril's clan winds up being wiped out, if the Arishok dies, if the Qunari reclaim their book, where Feynriel winds up studying (I assume this is a lore change due to his unique power)... that's all I can think of at the moment. I have a nagging feeling I'm issing a couple, but it's still pretty limited.

Note I'm not mentioning changes to companions' personal lives because I didn't go into detail about DA:O's companions' epilogues.

I am pretty sure that the elven Bann is murdered. At least on all the youtube account I watched with that ending, but else, but I will take you worth for it. And yes in hindsight it was obvious that many of the boons would go wrong because the monarch saying it is so, is not always enough for it to be so.

I think Orzommar is the one with significant lore change because both Harrowman and Behelen drastically changes either how Orzommar interacts with the outside world (Harrowman) or changes how Orzommar is run fundementally (Behlen).

Merills clan being wiped out I don't think off as lorechanging because that is the risk all the clan have and one off the reasons the dalish is seperated into small clans. In the same saying I don't see Redcliff as lore changing either, because it is honestly just a matter off fact about who lives and dies.

I think we are just not going to agree to what lore changing mean. You seem to think that it means a significant choice that has consequences, and I mean a significant change to the established lore. I have a hunch that we will not even agree on the word significant.

[Pandaman102]

esper wrote...

I am pretty sure that the elven Bann is murdered. At least on all the youtube account I watched with that ending, but else, but I will take you worth for it.

Alright, I looked up the known epilogue slides regarding the Alienage and see where you got that idea from. There are three alternate slides for which elf becomes bann, one generic slide that just says things become better for the elves, and a fifth slide that talks about the murder of an elven bann. I've only played a City Elf Warden once, but I don't remember seeing the murder slide, so there must be other factors that dictate if that flag ever triggers (if it was intended to happen 100% of the time it wouldn't be controlled by a flag, it'll just be hardcoded into the slideshow).

And yes in hindsight it was obvious that many of the boons would go wrong because the monarch saying it is so, is not always enough for it to be so.

I'm sorry, I don't want to sound confrontational, but again: that's not what was in DA:O's epilogue. Your assumptions that it won't make a difference is purely speculative. The basis of your speculation may be reasonable, but that does not change the fact that nothing in DA:O's data files that suggests all of the boons are reversed or ignored after the epilogue.

Let me put it this way: what you think "really" happened is entirely on you. You chose to not believe in the epilogues and I shouldn't try to dissuade you from how you wrapped up your Warden's contributions (or lack thereof) to Ferelden. That's fine for you, that's how you enjoyed the game, but you cannot categorically apply this standard to everyone and use your personal assumptions as an argument to claim decisions didn't matter in DA:O.

I think we are just not going to agree to what lore changing mean. You seem to think that it means a significant choice that has consequences, and I mean a significant change to the established lore. I have a hunch that we will not even agree on the word significant.

Fair enough, I was using "lore" since I couldn't really think of a better term for it. Maybe "military, political, economic, and social states of various historically noteworthy factions and individuals" specific to the particular Warden being played? I can't honestly call it the "Warden's story" because not all of the changes are directly experienced by the Warden him/herself.

Either way it's a godawful mouthful and I'll gladly drop the topic if it means I don't have to use that phrase instead of "lore" every time.

Modifié par Pandaman102, 07 décembre 2012 - 02:48 .

[Ridwan]

I agree with this Lydia woman on all her points. Absolutely hated having Anders with me cause of his healing abilities.