174 réponses à ce sujet

[Darth Death]

Was DA2 a personal story? Yes.
Was DA2 a good personal story? No.

Hawke's family was annoying, & when they started dropping like flies throughout the story, it felt more like a blessing than a tragedy. Leandra's fake crying made me throw my hands over my face in embarrassment. Her constant whining over the estate was nothing short of child-like entitlement. She left her family for some apostate & expects to retain what she'd forsaken long ago. I wished there was an option to humbly slap her, but I guess her death will have to suffice.

[Sir JK]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I disagree. A story cannot just take place within and have no outward display and still be labeled a personal story. If that were the case, you could read a history textbook outlining the events of the reign of Cardinal Richilieu and his actions and have that be a "personal story," despite it being in a textbook and us having no idea what type of internal or emotional struggles Richilieu underwent.

If we think about Hawke as being an Origin, that of a refugee fleeing from a Blight-devastated Lothering, we can begin to see how this was an attempt at a more personal story. The amount of reactivity to that origin is pretty stunning (if it were an option). Hawke arrives with family members (and is either an Apostate Mage or has an Apostate Mage sibling) and a companion they recruited on their flight of Ferelden and with a mission to deliver the amulet to Sundermount for Flemeth. This Origin is then referenced multiple times, with your family being tied into the main story and the actions of your family members tying into things.

Let's imagine, instead, that there were multiple Origins. Let's say that, just like with Duncan, Flemeth encountered a different group of travelers, say a group of Dwarves escpaing from the new Dwarven king's reign. Or a Dalish elf who is either chasing the werewolf survivors, or was the last of the their tribe that avoided the butchering the Warden could have unleashed, with a drive for revenge. Or a Denerim noble who had to flee from their city right before the Warden's final battle there.

Most of the game could have played out the same way, in regards to gaining entrance by joining a merc group, attempting to go on the expedition in order to make life much more comfortable, being chosen to deal with the Qunari, keeping peace with the Mages, etc.

I'm not arguing that multiple races should have been in DA2. I'm not even arguing that multiple origins should have been. But if they HAD and they all had the same (or near, I'd take a step or two down on the totally custom story of Hawke's family) elements of reference to where you came from and your Origin, the game would have been heralded as a masterpiece. Well, maybe not a MASTERPIECE (there were still a lot of gameplay issues I had with the game, many of which are starting to come back like flashbacks with a third playthrough I just sparked up), but it would have been viewed as a triumph of giving a more personal story based on the character's background.

Imagine if Hawke's mother dying by the serial killer was a custom content quest series, where each Origin had their own tragedy play out in a (somewhat) similar fashion. Not that you'd have a serial killer zombify a family member via blood magic, but say if you were a dwarf you brought your fiance with you and, now that you had an estate and established a stable home, you all were going to be married. But then Elven Qunari converts kidnapped her and wound up assassinating her, for some plot reason. 

Just like Hawke was pitted to take a look at the dangers of blood magic with his mom's death, the above story could show how dangerous the spread of the Qunari faith, especially the fanaticism of early converts that can result in actions outside of that faith, can be. That would be a more personal story for my dwarf origin I just spun up on the fly.


Point being, if Hawke's story was an OPTION, one of many, it would have been viewed as great. But as a stand-alone, it falls short of hooking us in with Hawke's history and personal reasons, yet it also constricts us into dealing with certain undeniable set aspects. Which leaves a lukewarm middle ground that can be dissatisfying to some (if not many).

Heh.

Serves me right for trying to keep my post brief and not going into length what I mean.

Let me begin with that you're right. There's more required than just a structure. A story may be a personal one, but with no indication that it is and no display of emotion or thought process or growth it will fail to deliver what it has set up to do. Personal stories take place in the personal sphere, which may or may not include family, but the journey needs to be displayed. Much like that the protagonist needs to gather his strength to overcome his tasks in the Quest, if there is no gathering of strength then the threat was not credible and the whole thing just a waste of time.

I thought DA2 gave me the tools to make such a journey (and has allowed me to make several, with different protagonists) but I can see that said tools could not deliver it to everyone.

Your lengthy discussion on Origins highlight precisely what I meant regarding that family need not be part of a personal story. I agree completely here. What makes something a Personal Story is how it is constructed at it's core, not whether certain elements are included. How certain elements of the protagonist is highlighted, and others are just part of the problem.

If we go by your examples, a personal story with the Dalish hunting werewolves would include the quest for revenge hanging like a spectre. It would be what leads you into all conflicts and essentially haunts your character. The struggle for a new life and a happy marriage would be the same thing for the dwarf. It would hang looming there and always be just outside the grasp. In both cases, it'd be nothing more than a mirror with which to highlight something regarding the protagonist.

There's actually nothing that makes a personal story prevent Origins, as you say, except possibly resources (a personal story does need much more focus on the protagonist after all). Naturally, pulling it off in a traditional rpg is tricky (evidently). That bioware could have succeeded better is without a doubt I'd say. Having race options and/or origin's would no doubt have made it slightly less palatable, but I wonder if it really had been better recieved. After all, the number of people who think the game lacks a plot strikes me as have expected a completely different type of story.

Unless I completely misundertsood you, I think we agree

[Nashimura]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I think the framed narrative approach could have been done really well with an RPG, but ultimately wasn't delivered quite as well as it could have been for DA2.

Just after Alpha protocol did it so well, that did not help - if DA2 had landed the first punch it might of seemed better. I think where Alpha Protocol got it right was letting you answer to what was being said, the whole interrogation with Leland is very reactive to what you have done and you get to justify your actions....or just be a jerk to the man interrogating you.

I think if the interrogation with Cassandra had a tad more reactivity and the chance to somehow directly effect what is being said it would of been much better.

Modifié par Nashimura, 18 janvier 2013 - 06:14 .

[esper]

Nashimura wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I think the framed narrative approach could have been done really well with an RPG, but ultimately wasn't delivered quite as well as it could have been for DA2.

Just after Alpha protocol did it so well, that did not help - if DA2 had landed the first punch it might of seemed better. I think where Alpha Protocol got it right was letting you answer to what was being said, the whole interrogation with Leland is very reactive to what you have done and you get to justify your actions....or just be a jerk to the man interrogating you. I think if the interrogation with Cassandra had a tad more reactivity and the chance to somehow directly effect what is being said it would of been much better.

I don't think that is it.

What would have made the frame good, would be if the past actually changed it.

Say, when going into the Deep Road. Instead of Cassandra always going off about how Hawke came to Kirkwall spread upsurption/subversion have her say something about who Hawke actually supported:

Something like:
'No, the champion was a apostate who came usurp the chantry' - Hawke being pro-mage.
'No, the champion was a apostate who protected the city from her own kind' - Hawke being pro-templar


That way we would have seen how our actions actually change the perception of Hawke in the world.

I love da2, but bioware utterly failed the frame. It is a cool device in videogames (played a plenty with them) and bioware did not utterlize it at all.

[Nashimura]

esper wrote...

Nashimura wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I think the framed narrative approach could have been done really well with an RPG, but ultimately wasn't delivered quite as well as it could have been for DA2.

Just after Alpha protocol did it so well, that did not help - if DA2 had landed the first punch it might of seemed better. I think where Alpha Protocol got it right was letting you answer to what was being said, the whole interrogation with Leland is very reactive to what you have done and you get to justify your actions....or just be a jerk to the man interrogating you. I think if the interrogation with Cassandra had a tad more reactivity and the chance to somehow directly effect what is being said it would of been much better.

I don't think that is it.

What would have made the frame good, would be if the past actually changed it.

Say, when going into the Deep Road. Instead of Cassandra always going off about how Hawke came to Kirkwall spread upsurption/subversion have her say something about who Hawke actually supported:

Something like:
'No, the champion was a apostate who came usurp the chantry' - Hawke being pro-mage.
'No, the champion was a apostate who protected the city from her own kind' - Hawke being pro-templar


That way we would have seen how our actions actually change the perception of Hawke in the world.

I love da2, but bioware utterly failed the frame. It is a cool device in videogames (played a plenty with them) and bioware did not utterlize it at all.

Thats what i meant when i said more reactivity, i agree it should of changed more based on what you did. You had a few parts where it did, like what happens to your sibling.....but not enough.

[esper]

Nashimura wrote...

esper wrote...

Nashimura wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I think the framed narrative approach could have been done really well with an RPG, but ultimately wasn't delivered quite as well as it could have been for DA2.

Just after Alpha protocol did it so well, that did not help - if DA2 had landed the first punch it might of seemed better. I think where Alpha Protocol got it right was letting you answer to what was being said, the whole interrogation with Leland is very reactive to what you have done and you get to justify your actions....or just be a jerk to the man interrogating you. I think if the interrogation with Cassandra had a tad more reactivity and the chance to somehow directly effect what is being said it would of been much better.

I don't think that is it.

What would have made the frame good, would be if the past actually changed it.

Say, when going into the Deep Road. Instead of Cassandra always going off about how Hawke came to Kirkwall spread upsurption/subversion have her say something about who Hawke actually supported:

Something like:
'No, the champion was a apostate who came usurp the chantry' - Hawke being pro-mage.
'No, the champion was a apostate who protected the city from her own kind' - Hawke being pro-templar


That way we would have seen how our actions actually change the perception of Hawke in the world.

I love da2, but bioware utterly failed the frame. It is a cool device in videogames (played a plenty with them) and bioware did not utterlize it at all.

Thats what i meant when i said more reactivity, i agree it should of changed more based on what you did. You had a few parts where it did, like what happens to your sibling.....but not enough.

I read it as if you interacted with the frame. Which wouldn't have made sense in da2 as your character was not part of the frame. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

And, yeah, good (plot) frames in game react to the choices.

I have played games that wasn't even role playing game which did that.

Modifié par esper, 18 janvier 2013 - 06:32 .

[addiction21]

esper wrote...

I read it as if you interacted with the frame. Which wouldn't have made sense in da2 as your character was not part of the frame. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

And, yeah, good (plot) frames in game react to the choices.

I have played games that wasn't even role playing game which did that.

I can get behind that 100%
Then again I would like more of that in the game in general. DA2 took some steps towards that. Like with Feynriel and other similar quests. Ending slides are nice but I'd prefer for it to happen in game.
Say you support Bhelen then as you leave there are dwarfs starting a trade caravan or a few more Dwarfs pop up in denerim as shop keeps or just NPCs. Then with Harrowmont the gates are closed and there is no more entry allowed ever. The last one is a little extreme cutting so many of the zones off but just a idea.

[esper]

addiction21 wrote...

esper wrote...

I read it as if you interacted with the frame. Which wouldn't have made sense in da2 as your character was not part of the frame. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

And, yeah, good (plot) frames in game react to the choices.

I have played games that wasn't even role playing game which did that.

I can get behind that 100%
Then again I would like more of that in the game in general. DA2 took some steps towards that. Like with Feynriel and other similar quests. Ending slides are nice but I'd prefer for it to happen in game.
Say you support Bhelen then as you leave there are dwarfs starting a trade caravan or a few more Dwarfs pop up in denerim as shop keeps or just NPCs. Then with Harrowmont the gates are closed and there is no more entry allowed ever. The last one is a little extreme cutting so many of the zones off but just a idea.

Yeah, epilog slides leaves me cold,
If the consequence is not showing up in game, it might as well not show up. This is one of the places where I feel show, don't tell. And epilog slides are tell to me.

Though I do think you example is a little unrealistic, I could see Bhelen open shops, but not harrowman closing off quickly when he has a blight to fight as promised. Perhaps he could begin chasing the shopkeepers at the gate of orzommar away (as they won't be needed anymore when he execute his plan for closing down the city from the surface world.)

[addiction21]

esper wrote...


Though I do think you example is a little unrealistic, I could see Bhelen open shops, but not harrowman closing off quickly when he has a blight to fight as promised. Perhaps he could begin chasing the shopkeepers at the gate of orzommar away (as they won't be needed anymore when he execute his plan for closing down the city from the surface world.)

Yes, it was a little extreme. Just the first one to pop in my mind.

[esper]

addiction21 wrote...

esper wrote...


Though I do think you example is a little unrealistic, I could see Bhelen open shops, but not harrowman closing off quickly when he has a blight to fight as promised. Perhaps he could begin chasing the shopkeepers at the gate of orzommar away (as they won't be needed anymore when he execute his plan for closing down the city from the surface world.)

Yes, it was a little extreme. Just the first one to pop in my mind.

We have a saying in danish, translated it would go like this: 'Hyperbole helps understanding'

[ReallyRue]

Some of my Hawkes are completely different at the end of the game, compared to how they were at the beginning. That's kind of the whole point of us picking dialogue options - to mould the character. How far you can mould them doesn't change the fact that you *can*, and the character can easily change over the game if you wish it.

[Renmiri1]

ReallyRue wrote...

Some of my Hawkes are completely different at the end of the game, compared to how they were at the beginning. That's kind of the whole point of us picking dialogue options - to mould the character. How far you can mould them doesn't change the fact that you *can*, and the character can easily change over the game if you wish it.

Thanks for interrupting the DA2 hatefest

People who praise DA2 truly like the game, and as many posts proved here, they praise stuff that is in the game, not some imaginary game that is in your head that you are angry Bioware didn't make.

[addiction21]

esper wrote...

We have a saying in danish, translated it would go like this: 'Hyperbole helps understanding'

Not sure if I understand your saying. It was just a example that came to my mind. Given Harrowmont does go for isolation it is fitting but like I said on the extreme side for a game.
What you mentioned the Dwarf merchants being chased away outside the gate to Orzammar would be more fitting and would still allow access to the city and deeproads. So unfinished quests or visits would still be possible.

[AlexanderCousland]

Nashimura wrote...

Thats what i meant when i said more reactivity, i agree it should of changed more based on what you did. You had a few parts where it did, like what happens to your sibling.....but not enough.

It give' s me no small amount of pleasure to read this statement.

[esper]

addiction21 wrote...

esper wrote...

We have a saying in danish, translated it would go like this: 'Hyperbole helps understanding'

Not sure if I understand your saying. It was just a example that came to my mind. Given Harrowmont does go for isolation it is fitting but like I said on the extreme side for a game.
What you mentioned the Dwarf merchants being chased away outside the gate to Orzammar would be more fitting and would still allow access to the city and deeproads. So unfinished quests or visits would still be possible.

It basically means that exaggarating things makes it a little easier to understand. Not sure if I use hyperbolde correct as my own understand off hyperbole is a little techincal do to being a narrative student. Hyperbolde might means something different outside of the context of narrative theoru now that you mention it.

And yes, it is doable and should be how the consequences are handled. The only epilog I care about is my PC and that I can live without at long as I get a sense of closure and I don't demand much in that direction.

[Knight of Dane]

esper wrote...

addiction21 wrote...

esper wrote...

We have a saying in danish, translated it would go like this: 'Hyperbole helps understanding'

Not sure if I understand your saying. It was just a example that came to my mind. Given Harrowmont does go for isolation it is fitting but like I said on the extreme side for a game.
What you mentioned the Dwarf merchants being chased away outside the gate to Orzammar would be more fitting and would still allow access to the city and deeproads. So unfinished quests or visits would still be possible.

It basically means that exaggarating things makes it a little easier to understand. Not sure if I use hyperbolde correct as my own understand off hyperbole is a little techincal do to being a narrative student. Hyperbolde might means something different outside of the context of narrative theoru now that you mention it.

And yes, it is doable and should be how the consequences are handled. The only epilog I care about is my PC and that I can live without at long as I get a sense of closure and I don't demand much in that direction.

Isn't "Exagerrating helps/promotes understanding" a better translation?

Det var "Overdrivelse fremmer forståelsen" du mente, ikke?
At least hyperbole throws me off 

[addiction21]

Knight of Dane wrote...

Isn't "Exagerrating helps/promotes understanding" a better translation?

Det var "Overdrivelse fremmer forståelsen" du mente, ikke?
At least hyperbole throws me off 

I would agree that is a better translation but reading Esper's post it made it clear the idea of it.

[BillWatson08]

Plaintiff wrote...

FreshIstay wrote...

Psssh. Dont try to take some sort of moral high ground on me like you dont participate in debate' s that' s kind of hypotcritical. Abolished/Disbanded/Disolved/Destroyed we can go on and on with semantic' s you know the point of what I was trying to say. Lmao. THE CIRCLE DOESNT EXIST ANYMORE, you know the Chantry has fallen to Pieces from the beggining of the game and the entire world is about to go to War, and that' s why I said WHY play? What' s the point?

Well, I dunno about you, but when I play a story-based game, I do it because I want to know the story. As in the whole story, not just how it ends.

I used to have a friend who thought if you went to the last page of a book it was the same as reading the entire thing. 

[BillWatson08]

BrookerT wrote...

Dabrikishaw wrote...

Scarlet Rabbi wrote...

I too use to raise an eyebrow when I'd hear praise about DA2's companions having there own lives and not, as some basically put it, mindlessly waiting around a camp for the warden to interact with them.

To me, the only thing different is the setting. Yes, Fenris has the mansion, Isabela and Varric have the Hanged Man, etc. But they are doing the exact same thing the Origins' companions did, which is standing in the exact same spot (for almost ten years, I might add) waiting for Hawke to interact with them. I guess if you do half the creative work, you can imagine Isabela walking around the Hanged Man, drink in hand, flirting with the patrons. You can imagine Aveline at her desk piling through paperwork, or out back training her guardsmen.

But that's the thing isn't it? You, as the player, have to imagine the companions going about their own lives, the game doesn't it for you. If all it takes for people to claim that DA2's companions are 'going about their own lives' is to simply drop each companion in front of a different background, then hell, why can't I claim Origins' companions are going about their own lives, they just all happen to be in the same setting.

Morrigan and Fenris do the exact same thing when not actively in the party, they stand in the same spot, not moving, until they are placed in the party. Just because Fenris mimics a statue in a different spot then Merrill or Anders does not mean he's 'going about his life' while not in the party. Unless, as I said before, you as the player do half the work and imagine Fenris, in his mansion, cleaning up a bit or sipping wine in front of a roaring fireplace. And, if that's the case, I can rightly say that Leliana or Sten are actively going about their lives, they just happen to be in the same setting. I can easily imagine Sten cleaning his blade, or Leliana gathering herbs or preparing something to eat. Apparently, if I listen to those who claim DA2's companions had their own lives, that's all it takes; a little imagination.

My point being that in order to rightfully claim that companions are 'going about their own lives', they should....well, actually be going about their lives. Not standing around like a beef eater, just in a different setting than the other companions. This burdens the player with half the work of imagining the companion interacting with their setting. And if that's the case, then Origins companions were going about their own lives just as much as DA2's were, they just all happen to be in the same setting.

When people say that dragon age 2's characters having there own lives, that don't really mean they move around as such. You mentioned imagining characters going about there lives? Dragon age 2 tells you they do, you don't have to imagine it. 

We are told through party banter that Fenris is playing poker with Aveline's husband do nic, where they discuss the possibly of Aveline and donnic having children. 

Carver tries to join the Kirkwall guard, but Aveline tell s them not to accept him.

These are some examples of companions living there own lives outside of Hawke. It's antitrust possible to argue that origins had these as well, when people describe b the companions living there own lives, this is generally what they mean.

I've been watching a lot of 'How I met your mother' lately. The five major characters spend a lot of time at their local bar. To those who only see them at the bar, it must seem that, that's all they ever do. 

The complaint that people seem to have with the companions in their personal life is they just stand around. But that's just a convenience. Might and Magic 9 had characters who could train you but they moved around the city and it was real annoying from a game standpoint, to have to locate them. I'd hate to have to do that with Dragon Age. It is after all a game, not reality. No game will ever give you every option available.

[Cyberfrog81]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

 We actually did have more "fake" scenes, but there was a bit of a pacing issue, and felt it was making the crit path come across as a bit inconsistent, where it bounces between campy and serious, while making Varric's interactions with Cassandra a bit less interesting and consistent (I bet Bertrand's survived because it was pretty well done IMO haha)

Yeah, I liked it at the time. Made a video about it that I named "Die Hard in Kirkwall".


As for the topic, I kind of agree, though
(1) the main thing is that, personal story or not, I did not find Hawke very interesting as a character; strange, considering how crazy his or her life is.

(2) it was a step up from the camp. A very tiny step, not a leap.

[AshenShug4r]

EntropicAngel wrote...

I'm going to reply to the OP--not regarding the conversation going on around me.

1. Nope, you're wrong. DA ][ is a personal story because it tells of Hawke's rise to fame. It isn't about him changing necessarily as a person, but about his status, his influence, his effect on the world.

So then it's not a personal story.

[Renmiri1]

AshenShug4r wrote...

EntropicAngel wrote...

I'm going to reply to the OP--not regarding the conversation going on around me.

1. Nope, you're wrong. DA ][ is a personal story because it tells of Hawke's rise to fame. It isn't about him changing necessarily as a person, but about his status, his influence, his effect on the world.

So then it's not a personal story.

???

What do you mean ? 

[CrystaJ]

Because Hawke needs to fundamentally change as a person for things to be "personal", I guess.

Even though all those things are still centered around him.

Modifié par CrystaJ, 19 janvier 2013 - 09:02 .

[The Hierophant]

Renmiri1 wrote...

AshenShug4r wrote...

EntropicAngel wrote...

I'm going to reply to the OP--not regarding the conversation going on around me.

1. Nope, you're wrong. DA ][ is a personal story because it tells of Hawke's rise to fame. It isn't about him changing necessarily as a person, but about his status, his influence, his effect on the world.

So then it's not a personal story.

???

What do you mean ? 

Isn't Hawke's story basically an autobiographical account that's told by an unreliable narrator?

*edit* oopsie

Modifié par The Hierophant, 20 janvier 2013 - 05:29 .