330 réponses à ce sujet

[Kais Endac]

I'm shocked at how easily I got drawn back in I really did intend to abandon ship - oh well If you can't drown in peace might as well..........erm..........well do something.

Perhaps it's because out of all my friends I'm the only one that likes rpg's they all prefer games like COD and Fifa so I can't really talk to them about it so......here I am.

Pseudocognition wrote...

I don't see the argument here; whether a character is proactive is entirely up to how you roleplay them. You can roleplay a Hawke who wants desperately to fix up Kirkwall and pursues any opportunity that arises to do so. Or you can roleplay a Hawke who waits around for the plot to come to drag them out of bed. Ditto the Warden.

But the fact is that regardless of how you roleplay them, the nature of a video game character is to be dragged along by a plot. No video game character is not fundamentally an errand boy, unless you're like... playing Skyrim and completely ignoring the quests.

1000% agree to be honest I've never even considered (until now) whether a character is proactive or reactive in a video game. All I know is when I play a game  I roleplay the character as a mix of my own personality and the characters pre-existing attributes (if there is a pre-defined character).

But sometimes it's hard to remember that while I have pretty much all the facts, there *are* things in the DA universe that the Warden/Hawke is not aware of that I am. Which leads to situations that I think why didn't the main character do this or that when in actual fact he wasn't aware of the problem or consequences in the first place. And had they acted it would have been out of character. 

So I will finish this post with
I love Dragon Age Origins 
I love Dragon Age 2 
I have no major problems with the storyline of either
There are some areas in DA2 that I feel were rushed
The DLC to DA2 were brilliant (in my opinion)
I like the Warden's Story
I like the Champion's story
and finally I can't wait to play Dragon Age 3
Keep up the epic work Bioware 

Modifié par Kais Endac, 15 janvier 2013 - 12:10 .

[AlexanderCousland]

Pseudocognition wrote...

I don't see the argument here; whether a character is proactive is entirely up to how you roleplay them. You can roleplay a Hawke who wants desperately to fix up Kirkwall and pursues any opportunity that arises to do so. Or you can roleplay a Hawke who waits around for the plot to come to drag them out of bed. Ditto the Warden.

But the fact is that regardless of how you roleplay them, the nature of a video game character is to be dragged along by a plot. A character can't be 'proactive' until the plot gives your them something to be proactive about, making them inherently reactive. No video game character is not fundamentally an errand boy, unless you're like... playing Skyrim and completely ignoring the quests.

The fundamental problem with this statement is that Hawke can't be proactive about "fixing up" anything, this story doesnt allow it. Specifically, because DA2 is a framed narraitive, which means everything "Big" that happened didnt result out of any thing Hawke could have caused or decided upon (Big- Qunari War, Blowing up the Chantry) Within the context of the narrative design, The plot quite literally dragged Hawke out of bed. Varric is essentially telling you Hawke' s story, so the climax of every act must happen the same way, get rich, qunari war, chantry destruction, with one glaring choice Templar=Viscount Mages=Nothing. Your companions are equally (if not more) important to Hawke' s story as Hawke himself, and as such he must be a confidant of his friends wether he prefers to or not. (the game relies on emotions quite heavily)  Im not saying you cant RP wanting to fix things, Im saying that you cant fix them because your not playing the game to change anything or be significant, Your playing to find out about something that already happend. Youre Playing a Character of "Why?" Why did this happen? How do I Feel about this situation, that already occured. 

DAO is a story of "HOW"  How did you Unite the Lands and defeat the Blight? What DAO does is give you a problem, and then let' s you solve the problem the way you personally see fit, If the Warden is not Proactive, then YOU are not Proactive about solving the blight, which means you didnt finish the game and thought the story sucked. 

[Pseudo the Mustachioed]

Regardless of whether a character can or cannot ultimately affect the outcome of any plot is independent from the character's attitude about it. "Proactive" is an attitude. Success or failure is unrelated to the desire to take action.

Wait
wait

so the climax of every act must happen the same way, get rich, qunari war, chantry destruction,

Are you actually implying that DA:O DIDN'T also beat you over the head with the same plot points every single game? That I could have done anything at all, not just the options provided to me?!

Well, it did. Congratulations, you are playing a video game. The only things that can happen in it have been scripted and planned for your consumption. No matter how much it feels like you are having an epic adventure of infinite variables, you're in a box, and no matter how in charge of the plot you feel, you are still being pushed from plot point to plot point by these scripted, predetermined events that are programmed to predict every possible player input. The Warden will always succeed in ending the Blight after [list major DA:O plot points here], Hawke will always to be caught up in the circumstances that erupted into a war after [list major DA2 plot points here]. You like the former better, that's all this is.

I don't appreciate your insinuation that I ~must not have finished DA:O~ because I don't see your point. I've played it four times, once again just last month with the specific intention of comparing it to DA2, and your argument still is not compelling.

Modifié par Pseudocognition, 15 janvier 2013 - 05:38 .

[SilentK]

Hmm... first time I posted in this thread I just read the OP and contributed my post since I was just so happy at reading a happy positive post. Now I've read what the thread morphed into and I'm with the people happily playing DAII-group. DA:O was a great story and I care for all my Wardens but DAII is more of the sort of game that I enjoy playing. VO and just the connections to the companions. DA:O is on it's shelf, much cared for but rarely played but DAII keeps entertained with new Hawkes. And yes, I found the dlc for DAII to be really really good, so bummed that there were not more of them.



In short, I love DAII and ME3 to bits and pieces and hope to see more of these types of games. Different people like different things. Have fun on the forum 

Modifié par SilentK, 15 janvier 2013 - 07:27 .

[Commander Kurt]

Glad to read the OP, I feel much the same way (though I prefer DA:O over DA 2, with the DA 2 dlc beating both).

Regarding the use of the word "proactive", can't you just use a different word? You really aren't using it right. To be proactive just means that you act before something is even an issue to make sure it stays that way. Someone who is proactive is not MORE active, or more successful than someone who is reactive.

Loghain poisoning Eamon was a very proactive thing to do. He eliminated that threat before it even arose. As some clever poster before me stated, you can always RP your character to be proactive (I killed Kelder not for what he had done but for what I assumed he was want to do, or I got rid of Bhelen because I suspected that him being honourbound to help me really wouldn't mean much), but as a whole? No. You are confronted with a mess as a player and you fix it. That is the very definition of being reactive.

Perhaps you could use words like "passive" or "inconsequential" instead? I suspect they better fit what you're trying to say.

Oh, and be nice to one another. No need to hurl insults over a difference of opinion.

[katiebour]

OP's post makes me happy and I am in utter agreement. Also more than a little jealous of OP and his wife's awesome tattoos.

Kudos Bioware! Can't wait to see what 2013 brings!

[AlexanderCousland]

Pseudocognition wrote...

Regardless of whether a character can or cannot ultimately affect the outcome of any plot is independent from the character's attitude about it. "Proactive" is an attitude. Success or failure is unrelated to the desire to take action.

Wait
wait

so the climax of every act must happen the same way, get rich, qunari war, chantry destruction,

Are you actually implying that DA:O DIDN'T also beat you over the head with the same plot points every single game? That I could have done anything at all, not just the options provided to me?!

Well, it did. Congratulations, you are playing a video game. The only things that can happen in it have been scripted and planned for your consumption. No matter how much it feels like you are having an epic adventure of infinite variables, you're in a box, and no matter how in charge of the plot you feel, you are still being pushed from plot point to plot point by these scripted, predetermined events that are programmed to predict every possible player input. The Warden will always succeed in ending the Blight after [list major DA:O plot points here], Hawke will always to be caught up in the circumstances that erupted into a war after [list major DA2 plot points here]. You like the former better, that's all this is.

I don't appreciate your insinuation that I ~must not have finished DA:O~ because I don't see your point. I've played it four times, once again just last month with the specific intention of comparing it to DA2, and your argument still is not compelling.

Here' s were we agree:

Your in a box, and one singular thing is bound to happen within the confines of the game.

Here' s were we disagree :

How the story is told, and your freedom to the shape it within your sandbox. There' s no one way to complete origins, from Character Creation to the order you choose to complete your quests (after ostagar). So effectively, You are proactively driving the Warden to stop a perceived problem. synonym for proactive - foresight, farseeing.

Hawke already happend, He Was a Champion, The Templars still won Kirkwall the only flexibility within DA2' s sandbox was which companions you like the most.  

What game I like the most is irrelevant to my point.

[AlexanderCousland]

Commander Kurt wrote...

Glad to read the OP, I feel much the same way (though I prefer DA:O over DA 2, with the DA 2 dlc beating both).

Regarding the use of the word "proactive", can't you just use a different word? You really aren't using it right. To be proactive just means that you act before something is even an issue to make sure it stays that way. Someone who is proactive is not MORE active, or more successful than someone who is reactive .

Warden stopping the Blight to prevent it sacking Ferelden and spreading to other nations. <Proactive 

Success is a matter of perception and really cant be argued, I wont attempt. 

Modifié par FreshIstay, 15 janvier 2013 - 03:31 .

[RandomSyhn]

I just want to second the OP. I loved both games and love thanking the people who worked hard to make them happen. Can't wait for the third.

[Plaintiff]

FreshIstay wrote...

Commander Kurt wrote...

Glad to read the OP, I feel much the same way (though I prefer DA:O over DA 2, with the DA 2 dlc beating both).

Regarding the use of the word "proactive", can't you just use a different word? You really aren't using it right. To be proactive just means that you act before something is even an issue to make sure it stays that way. Someone who is proactive is not MORE active, or more successful than someone who is reactive .

Warden stopping the Blight to prevent it sacking Ferelden and spreading to other nations. <Proactive 

Success is a matter of perception and really cant be argued, I wont attempt. 

The Blight came first, so the warden is reacting to the Blight. Not to mention that his induction to the Wardens and the responsibility of eanding the Blight are both foisted on him whether he wants them or not. The same applies to all the problems he encounters along the way. He is reacting to problems.

All game/movie/story protagonists are reactive, at least to start off with. That's the way it always is. If they do become proactive, it's generally not until near the end.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 15 janvier 2013 - 03:41 .

[Sutekh]

FreshIstay wrote...

Warden stopping the Blight to prevent it sacking Ferelden and spreading to other nations. <Proactive 

No, it's really not. The Warden is forced to become one through a series of unfortunate events, and it's made very clear that Duncan being dead set on recruiting them, they would have 'been joined" no matter what. Try refusing to be a Warden and see what happens.

What would have been proactive is Wannabe Warden X learns of the Blight, Wannabe Warden X go looking for a way to be recruited in order to fight it. That's not what happens. Same goes for the rest of the game (and, btw, I don't see how it could be possible in a computer game. And also, not proactive is not necessarily a bad thing).

edit: ((OK. Basically what Plaintiff said. Teach me to go take care of RL things mid-post ))

Modifié par Sutekh, 15 janvier 2013 - 04:10 .

[SweQue]

Huge diffrence people. ffs.

Dragon Age set up = you're grey warden and you need to deal with the blight.

In Dragon Age 2 you have no choices of the outcome in the end. So don't even compare a set up with a conclusion - HUUUUGE DIFFRENCE. That would be like saying, Fallout 3 has no choices, I had to leave the bunker yet I didnt want to - that game is against choices - no it had a "set up" stop comparing that with the freaking majority of the game.

It doesnt matter if you side with the templars or mages, a revolution will still occur and you picked the bad side anyway.

In Dragon Age 1 you could impact if you or alistair should be king, if you're gonna sacrifice yourself or someone else etc.
Now if you only played Dragon Age 1 the ending would be way more epic and satisfying with all the choices and results. I also got an epilogue what happend to many characters and what impact my choices had - I got none in Dragon Age 2.

Lets be honest, if someone just picked up DA2 and played through it, would he be satisfied with the story and ending at all?

Modifié par SweQue, 15 janvier 2013 - 04:20 .

[AlexanderCousland]

Sutekh wrote...

FreshIstay wrote...

Warden stopping the Blight to prevent it sacking Ferelden and spreading to other nations. <Proactive 

No, it's really not. The Warden is forced to become one through a series of unfortunate events, and it's made very clear that Duncan being dead set on recruiting them, they would have 'been joined" no matter what. Try refusing to be a Warden and see what happens.

What would have been proactive is Wannabe Warden X learns of the Blight, Wannabe Warden X go looking for a way to be recruited in order to fight it. That's not what happens. Same goes for the rest of the game (and, btw, I don't see how it could be possible in a computer game. And also, not proactive is not necessarily a bad thing).

OMG. 
 
let' s try this again. Wether or not you wanted to be a Warden has no bearing on my point, the Warden still took the nesscary step' s to defeat the blight. NOBODY forced the Warden to do it, You dont wanna be a warden? dont play. Was it not the Warden spearheaded that movevment? Did you not complete the game in the order of your choosing? 

[Wulfram]

I think the "proactive" stuff comes down to DA:O giving (or forcing on, if you're feeling negative) the player a clear objective that lasts the entire game after the prologue, while DA2 doesn't.

[Fredward]

I don't recommend actually doing this IRL because you WILL fall down an escalator that is going up. I've seen it happen. Like six times.

[Sutekh]

FreshIstay wrote...

let' s try this again. Wether or not you wanted to be a Warden has no bearing on my point, the Warden still took the nesscary step' s to defeat the blight. NOBODY forced the Warden to do it, You dont wanna be a warden? dont play. Was it not the Warden spearheaded that movevment? Did you not complete the game in the order of your choosing?

"You don't wanna be a Warden don't play" is the worst argument I've ever heard. Really. So if I want my character to be proactive, all I can do is not play? Basically, me, the player, controls nothing in the game except shutting it down. OK.

As for nobody forced the Warden? The plot forces the Warden. The plot puts the Warden into situations to which the Warden always reacts. Look what happens from Redcliffe to Denerim. Everytime, the Warden comes for one thing (generally, to enforce the Treaty) they are confronted to an unrelated situation they have to solve. They react to the problem. Circle, Orzammar, Brecilian, Sacred Ashes, Battle of Denerim: reaction after reaction after reaction. The only time he's really in control is the Dark Ritual.

Proactive means "Acting in advance to deal with an expected difficulty". The Warden never acts in advance (except the DR). That they solve the problem isn't the point. They do. We know that.

Analogy: Vaccination is proactive. Treatment is reactive. Proactive action against the Blight: killing Urthemiel before he (she?) awakes. Reactive: Killing Urthemiel after he's awake and the Blight has begun. The Warden is the treatment, not the vaccination.

And, again, there's nothing wrong with that.

[esper]

Wulfram wrote...

I think the "proactive" stuff comes down to DA:O giving (or forcing on, if you're feeling negative) the player a clear objective that lasts the entire game after the prologue, while DA2 doesn't.

It is still a reaction to the blight, the warden simply reacts that on the fact the whole situation has gone from bad to worse (with all the other warden dead). You have a choice on how to react to the fact the you have no army and the blight is coming soon.

A proaction would be taking a step to prevent the blight ever coming to Fereldan.

But I think advocating a proacting in a videogame is hard do to the reactive nature of heroes in general.

[Wulfram]

esper wrote...

It is still a reaction to the blight, the warden simply reacts that on the fact the whole situation has gone from bad to worse (with all the other warden dead). You have a choice on how to react to the fact the you have no army and the blight is coming soon.

A proaction would be taking a step to prevent the blight ever coming to Fereldan.

But I think advocating a proacting in a videogame is hard do to the reactive nature of heroes in general.

Yes, but you're reacting in a proactive way.  Or something like that.

You're working towards a clear goal, with a plan and a sense of progression.  And a sense that the ultimate outcome is down to your efforts.

In DA2, you lack a goal, so you can't really have a plan or something to progress towards.  So everything you do feels like firefighting.

To an extent, the fact that you're not travelling might play a role too, now that I think about it.  It means problems come to you, rather than you going to them.  Purely illusionary really, but it changes how you think about the story.

Modifié par Wulfram, 15 janvier 2013 - 05:00 .

[esper]

Wulfram wrote...

esper wrote...

It is still a reaction to the blight, the warden simply reacts that on the fact the whole situation has gone from bad to worse (with all the other warden dead). You have a choice on how to react to the fact the you have no army and the blight is coming soon.

A proaction would be taking a step to prevent the blight ever coming to Fereldan.

But I think advocating a proacting in a videogame is hard do to the reactive nature of heroes in general.

Yes, but you're reacting in a proactive way.  Or something like that.

You're working towards a clear goal, with a plan and a sense of progression.  And a sense that the ultimate outcome is down to your efforts.

In DA2, you lack a goal, so you can't really have a plan or something to progress towards.  So everything you do feels like firefighting.

To an extent, the fact that you're not travelling might play a role too, now that I think about it.  It means problems come to you, rather than you going to them.  Purely illusionary really, but it changes how you think about the story.

Reaction in a proactive way:blink:

Uhmm...

Are you talking about the perception of the games, as in the player's perception about if it is proactive or not? Or if it really is proactive or not?

[Wulfram]

esper wrote...

Are you talking about the perception of the games, as in the player's perception about if it is proactive or not? Or if it really is proactive or not?

Mostly the perception.  Real pro-activity is pretty much impossible in a story based game.

[esper]

Wulfram wrote...

esper wrote...

Are you talking about the perception of the games, as in the player's perception about if it is proactive or not? Or if it really is proactive or not?

Mostly the perception.  Real pro-activity is pretty much impossible in a story based game.

Ahh... okay that is a different discussion. It is possible impossible, because in real life proaction and reaction are a mixture off both.

I mean you know that the end of the world could be coming soon and beging to act to prevent that coming (proaction), but the very fact that you can take the steps is that you were informed that such a thing as the end of the world exists. (So an reaction of your knowlegde).

[LobselVith8]

SweQue wrote...

Huge diffrence people. ffs.

Dragon Age set up = you're grey warden and you need to deal with the blight.

In Dragon Age 2 you have no choices of the outcome in the end. So don't even compare a set up with a conclusion - HUUUUGE DIFFRENCE. That would be like saying, Fallout 3 has no choices, I had to leave the bunker yet I didnt want to - that game is against choices - no it had a "set up" stop comparing that with the freaking majority of the game.

It doesnt matter if you side with the templars or mages, a revolution will still occur and you picked the bad side anyway.

I think the difference, for some people, lies in how Hawke can be overly passive at times - like the situation where Hawke confronts Petrice after Ketojan dies, and he simply lets her walk away, or how Hawke doesn't do anything about Tallis having the list. I think it would be a different matter if Hawke at least tried to do something in those situations.

SweQue wrote...

In Dragon Age 1 you could impact if you or alistair should be king, if you're gonna sacrifice yourself or someone else etc.
Now if you only played Dragon Age 1 the ending would be way more epic and satisfying with all the choices and results. I also got an epilogue what happend to many characters and what impact my choices had - I got none in Dragon Age 2.

Lets be honest, if someone just picked up DA2 and played through it, would he be satisfied with the story and ending at all? 

Depends on the person. As we can see from the forum, some people like Dragon Age II, and some hate it with the passion of a thousand suns.

[SweQue]

My point is, Dragon Age 2 ending make sense if you await Dragon Age 3.
As a stand alone? its very "meh". In fact, the whole game feels like a spin-off, a lead in to Dragon Age 3, but without enough meat to substain itself as a great rpg.

I can't recommend any friends Dragon Age 2 because I dont know if they would invest in a sequal from this "7/10" game.

Modifié par SweQue, 15 janvier 2013 - 06:44 .

[esper]

SweQue wrote...

My point is, Dragon Age 2 ending make sense if you await Dragon Age 3.
As a stand alone? its very "meh". In fact, the whole game feels like a spin-off, a lead in to Dragon Age 3, but without enough meat to substain itself as a great rpg.

I can't recommend any friends Dragon Age 2 because I dont know if they would invest in a sequal from this "7/10" game.

I like da2 as a stand alone. I am not seeing it as just the brigde to da:I, which I btw, am not looking too much foreward to right now.

I would and do recommond da2 to my friends who I know have the same taste in gaming as I.

[addiction21]

SweQue wrote...

Lets be honest, if someone just picked up DA2 and played through it, would he be satisfied with the story and ending at all?

I will be honest. Your examples are bull**** and your just choosing where to start counting. DA:O the Blight ends and the Archedemon is defeated.
See what I did there? I doubt it but its exactly what your doing with DA2.

I would also hope that hypothetical person would decide for themselves and if they just happened to be satisfied with the story and ending of DA2 (that does not preclude them from being satisfied with DA:Os story and ending either) would be allowed to state that.
Without you or so many others lecturing them on why they are wrong and yours is the only valid opinion.