616 réponses à ce sujet

[wright1978]

Depends what you mean by Big final choice. Origins had naunced choices around the simple singular goal that were delivered properly. Kill archdemon is introduced early, specifics about death of warden revealed late(but not at end itself.) Several potential people can fulfill that role. Alternative dark ritual with different consequence introduced at same time by an existing character that you've had a game worth of experience in which to weigh up them and thereby place the suggestion they are offering in context.

[Wulfram]

krul2k wrote...

honestly the endings in the dragon age games have been fine so far no problems from me anyhow

DA:A was too abrupt.  You kill The Mother and then Epilogue slides.

DA2 had a strong "what was the point?" element to them, since all you really did was either help the Templars win when they were going to win anyway, or fail to defend a bunch of mages.  And gratiotously vanishing the Warden in the last minute was lame.

[esper]

wright1978 wrote...

Depends what you mean by Big final choice. Origins had naunced choices around the simple singular goal that were delivered properly. Kill archdemon is introduced early, specifics about death of warden revealed late(but not at end itself.) Several potential people can fulfill that role. Alternative dark ritual with different consequence introduced at same time by an existing character that you've had a game worth of experience in which to weigh up them and thereby place the suggestion they are offering in context.

I don't really think the choice was so nuanced. And it would be better if the armies you have gathered somehow factured into the ending, somehow.

Also, while I can see the theory behind the Dark Choice, it doesn't work if the the player/character (depending on level of roleplay) trusts Morrigan. Because that is what the choice boils down to. Trust Morrigan or not. If you do, then it is not really that difficult. And while a question of trust would be interesting in game, it would also be better if the fallout came in that same game.

[ofarrell]

Daralii wrote...

... Or people will throw a tantrum that will blot out the sun.

[Raizo]

cindercatz wrote...

@OP
Yeah, I don't think that's it. I'm all for my character surviving (and preferably showing up later in the series with the LI and a whole new thing goin' on, like I wanna see with the last two), but if they don't survive, that's fine too, so long as the story truly benefits from it.

The lessons they should take from ME3 are that characters are all important and we generally want to know what happens at least in the short term after we finish the game, that the endgame plot must be clear and consistent, that the ending should remain consistent with the themes built up throughout the game and series, and that our choices throughout should be taken into account in a substantial way. That's it, really.

Bravo. You pretty much summed up 90% of my issues with ME3 with this post.

[Goneaviking]

esper wrote...

I don't remember Morrigan ever mentioning the players soul... and as my pc are always good friend with Morrigan (thanks again easy gift system), why should she not trust her to bring the child up. Yes, it is properly going to be brought up to be ruthless and perhaps cynic too, but in the world of Thedas that is not a bad traits as for all the other stuff, well Morrigan seems to know what she is doing in fact she knows more about it than the pc so it boils down to wherever you trust Morrigan or not.

I'm going to pretend that's not a rhetorical question because I feel like answering it.

Because she's easily bribable, because she asks you to kill her mother for her without offering proof of her accusation and because every time I've taken her with me she favours a course of action I find repellant.

The gift system undermines the value of the friendship, if you can wind her up in every conversation you have with her and yet still have her fall for you because of the many many shinies you find on your quest it's a strong hint about the kind of messages she's going to be sending her offspring.

Admittedly she couldn't really offer proof of Flemeth's parasitism if she's the only one that could read the book, but the lack of proof is right there. It's a pattern repeated with the Dark Ritual, she's known the whole time but chosen not to tell you. If she didn't feel comfortable telling you her solution she could have at least told you how to take out the Archdemon, because for all she knew she could have died on any of the subquests along the way.

I haven't taken her on every storyline in the game but from memory she supports freeing the poisoner Jowan; killing the Circle, destroying the ashes and giving the anvil to Branka. If I'm wrong about any of those feel free to correct me, I usually sideline Morrigan fairly in the game because I don't care for her.

As for Conner, I am sorry, but it is a video game. I know I have time enough, but if we need to keep it in universe: Since aborminatiuon Conner didn't have the strenght to destroy Red Cliffe during all the time it took me to travel to the three other zones (and I always do Redcliff last), it is hard for my character to belive that it should suddenly get the strength to do it in a week, espcially when it have to retake control over the castle.

You could try doing Red Cliff first.

Of course, even if Connor couldn't destroy Red Cliff outright it's been shown that the demon is absolutely capable of killing more people in the space of time it takes to get to the Circle and back. Particuliarly if since they'll be travelling slower on the return trip because the amount of Lyrium they're likely to need for the ritual.

There's nothing wrong with using your knowledge of the genre conventions of course, but it's not hard to play in character and come to different solutions each time.

[Sil]

A happy ending is not quite as necessary with Dragon Age as we have changed protagonist every single game, however it wasn't the same thing with Mass Effect as we took Shepard on the whole journey from the beginning of the Reaper threat this cycle to it's conclusion, and because we played him so long, and made so many choices and heard so many characters talk about "When this is all over we'll make blue babies/live it large on the citadel/build a house/etc" that people craved a happy end.

In truth all people needed was a conclusive ending to the game which didn't just cut off and leave us hanging, but gave us some form of closure to the characters we have used. If Mass Effect 3's ending response taught Bioware anything, is that people need to see the aftermath of the events that we are involved with, and that people are far happier getting a massive list of slides or videos showing the aftermath of a conflict and your choices, then they are getting a quick ending that fades to black and leaves us speculating.

Or to put it simply, we'd rather a Lord of the Rings ending rather than the ending of The Grey.

[esper]

Goneaviking wrote...

esper wrote...

I don't remember Morrigan ever mentioning the players soul... and as my pc are always good friend with Morrigan (thanks again easy gift system), why should she not trust her to bring the child up. Yes, it is properly going to be brought up to be ruthless and perhaps cynic too, but in the world of Thedas that is not a bad traits as for all the other stuff, well Morrigan seems to know what she is doing in fact she knows more about it than the pc so it boils down to wherever you trust Morrigan or not.

I'm going to pretend that's not a rhetorical question because I feel like answering it.

Because she's easily bribable, because she asks you to kill her mother for her without offering proof of her accusation and because every time I've taken her with me she favours a course of action I find repellant.

The gift system undermines the value of the friendship, if you can wind her up in every conversation you have with her and yet still have her fall for you because of the many many shinies you find on your quest it's a strong hint about the kind of messages she's going to be sending her offspring.

Admittedly she couldn't really offer proof of Flemeth's parasitism if she's the only one that could read the book, but the lack of proof is right there. It's a pattern repeated with the Dark Ritual, she's known the whole time but chosen not to tell you. If she didn't feel comfortable telling you her solution she could have at least told you how to take out the Archdemon, because for all she knew she could have died on any of the subquests along the way.

I haven't taken her on every storyline in the game but from memory she supports freeing the poisoner Jowan; killing the Circle, destroying the ashes and giving the anvil to Branka. If I'm wrong about any of those feel free to correct me, I usually sideline Morrigan fairly in the game because I don't care for her.

As for Conner, I am sorry, but it is a video game. I know I have time enough, but if we need to keep it in universe: Since aborminatiuon Conner didn't have the strenght to destroy Red Cliffe during all the time it took me to travel to the three other zones (and I always do Redcliff last), it is hard for my character to belive that it should suddenly get the strength to do it in a week, espcially when it have to retake control over the castle.

You could try doing Red Cliff first.

Of course, even if Connor couldn't destroy Red Cliff outright it's been shown that the demon is absolutely capable of killing more people in the space of time it takes to get to the Circle and back. Particuliarly if since they'll be travelling slower on the return trip because the amount of Lyrium they're likely to need for the ritual.

There's nothing wrong with using your knowledge of the genre conventions of course, but it's not hard to play in character and come to different solutions each time.

being bribeable is not the same as being a bad parent, and all the thing you mention are not inheretly bad things. All my wardens support at least one of those things. Again no matter how reached, the full friendship points, means that my wardens have reached a certain degree off trust with Morrigan. 

Doing Red Cliffe first would be meta-gaming and out of my wardens' characters. 

Honestly I do not feel it has been shown. Connerabormination has not done and effectively job off killing people without the undead and has hurtled up into a corner scared. If it is meant to be dangerous beside summoning undead, bioware is doing a poor job in showing it. You didn't even have to kill the people it mind controllled only hit them hard enough.

[KiwiQuiche]

Actually I think the main problem with me3 end was the fact we had no idea what the hell happened. To me it felt like bioware said "here's a vague idea that doesn't make sense so go headcanon the rest cause we cant be bother telling it despite being the creators. And have completely new antgonist with insane troll logic that you must obey while your war assets do nothing lol"

[Ianamus]

If anything I think the lesson is "Don't kill off the protagonist in every possible ending while also stranding almost every single companion and NPC from the game in the middle of nowhere with no hope of escape for seemingly no reason other than to make the ending 'darker' "

Modifié par EJ107, 03 mars 2013 - 09:18 .

[Dabrikishaw]

esper wrote...

Official DJ Harbinger wrote...

There needs to be multiple DIFFERENT endings (not the so-called 'different' endings we got with ME3) like this:

Very Worst Ending - You Lose
Bad Ending - You win, but your character dies, along with most of your companions, and the world struggles to rebuild, whether they manage to sustain or not is left to interpretation.
Okay ending - You die, and a few companions do, but the world is saved and there is a clear explanation that there is hope for the future.
Good ending - You sacrifice yourself for everyone else, nearly everyone else lives.
Best ending - You survive, as does your companions (maybe one or two deaths to get the emotions going) and peace is restore forever.

The "Best ending" should be very hard to achieve and regardless of which ending we pick we need to be given multiple different epilogues varying on the choices we've made and lots of CLOSURE for the characters we care about.

This is the thing I NEVER EVER want to see.
This is an rpg, by having endings graded like that. (And now we are not even talking golden ending vs. bittersweet anymore) bioware is effectively stating if you don't do precisly as we imagine you do and take the choice we want you to take, then you don't get the best ending where you win in every possible way.

That will your problem then.

[SirPetrakus]

AlanC9 wrote...

SirPetrakus wrote...
Add to that the pre-EC consequences and the complete lack of post ending epilogue, people, I think, had every right to be unhappy. This was the end of the trilogy and we had nothing to work on. In the epilogue sequence for Throne of Bhaal, you at least got a few stills explaining what happened to your friends, in detail. In the pre-EC, it was just colors, explosions and crashes. Nobody had a clue what had happened.

Note that some other Bio games had weak epilogues too, as far as telling you what happens to the world and characters goes. BG1, the NWN OC, and KotOR, for instance. BG2 and SoU don't count because we knew sequels were coming.

I'm not even going to count BG1 and the NWN OC. BG1 because ... well, BG2 and ToB and NWN OC because, quite frankly, it sucked and nobody cared. It was all the extras that came along with the game that actually mattered. That and Aribeth. KotoR's would have legitimately sucked, if not for tying up all loose ends. There is nothing that needs resolving by the end of KotoR1. KotoR2, on the other hand, is great for setting up a KotoR3, as it implies the Exile going to find and help Revan in the outter rim, but since that actually happens in Drew's book, that leads up to ToR, well, that sucks donkey poo. We never get a chance to interact with that story. So all that build up was dropped.

You know, that reminds me of that other franchise that was like KotoR and had an even better second part, but all the interactivity was narrowed down to a minimum in the third part. I can't remember for the life of me what it was. It's right at the tip of my tongue ...

[Goneaviking]

esper wrote...
being bribeable is not the same as being a bad parent, and all the thing you mention are not inheretly bad things. All my wardens support at least one of those things. Again no matter how reached, the full friendship points, means that my wardens have reached a certain degree off trust with Morrigan. 

Doing Red Cliffe first would be meta-gaming and out of my wardens' characters. 

Honestly I do not feel it has been shown. Connerabormination has not done and effectively job off killing people without the undead and has hurtled up into a corner scared. If it is meant to be dangerous beside summoning undead, bioware is doing a poor job in showing it. You didn't even have to kill the people it mind controllled only hit them hard enough.

And being a good and well socialised person is not synonymous with being a good parent, but it's a good start. The gift system undermines the friendships, all it means is that she likes you for whatever reason. If you choose to recipricate those sentiments I don't fault you but it's in no way necessary. 

That's your choice. If you've never had a character that could see any benefit in taking Alistaire's advice and going after what would be an easy win (if not for the poisoning and it's consequences) and scoring a willing ally in your struggle against Loghaine then that's your prerogative.

Virtually everyone in the castle has been killed, and the village below has been under siege for who knows how long. If the only threat they faces was undead, there are plenty more corpses to raise including whoever died helping you defend to the village and retake the castle. Connor may have gone off to hide for the moment, but in the days you're away on the road there's nothing stopping him from subverting the will of his family and the knights and going on a killing spree in the meantime.

On a side note, I'd say that there actually is something inherently wrong someone who objects to the chantry's imprisonment and suppression of mages preferring to kill the victims of that policy rather than helping them.

[Goneaviking]

Dabrikishaw wrote...

esper wrote...

Official DJ Harbinger wrote...

There needs to be multiple DIFFERENT endings (not the so-called 'different' endings we got with ME3) like this:

Very Worst Ending - You Lose
Bad Ending - You win, but your character dies, along with most of your companions, and the world struggles to rebuild, whether they manage to sustain or not is left to interpretation.
Okay ending - You die, and a few companions do, but the world is saved and there is a clear explanation that there is hope for the future.
Good ending - You sacrifice yourself for everyone else, nearly everyone else lives.
Best ending - You survive, as does your companions (maybe one or two deaths to get the emotions going) and peace is restore forever.

The "Best ending" should be very hard to achieve and regardless of which ending we pick we need to be given multiple different epilogues varying on the choices we've made and lots of CLOSURE for the characters we care about.

This is the thing I NEVER EVER want to see.
This is an rpg, by having endings graded like that. (And now we are not even talking golden ending vs. bittersweet anymore) bioware is effectively stating if you don't do precisly as we imagine you do and take the choice we want you to take, then you don't get the best ending where you win in every possible way.

That will your problem then.

It'll be the problem of anyone who wants endings that make sense based on your choices.

If there's a range of endings it's desirable to have a mix of positive and negative outcomes determined by specific choices, and if some those outcomes are measured subjectively so much the better.

It adds to the replay value and gives an incentive to go back and do things differently.

[SirPetrakus]

Official DJ Harbinger wrote...

Best ending - You survive, as does your companions (maybe one or two deaths to get the emotions going) and peace is restore forever.

See, I have a problem with that right there. You kill people off, just for the emotions. No real reason, no point to their development, just so you 'cry evry tiem'. It serves no purpose. While in Mordin's case, it was part of his character's development and a conclusion befiting both the character and his personal dilema, it wasn't the case for every sacrifice. The Turian Primarch's son? Hardly new the guy, didn't care. Legion's death? Pointless and non-sensical. He died because someone thought he should die. The kid at the very begining? Brat got what he deserved. When Commander Shepard offers you a free pass out of Earth and you turn him down, you deserve what's coming, kid. Thane jumping on Kai Leng's sword, after kicking Leng's ass and after Leng spent 50 minutes kissing the ground, while nobody on my team thought that it would be a good time to shoot him. Frigging Garrus couldn't take a damn shot at this guy. Thankfully, Kai Leng's sword had caught the stupid as well and only managed to injure Thane, instead of down right kill him.

I'm OK with character deaths, but they have to serve a point in the narrative. Killing someone and then just telling me that I should be sad? We wouldn't have made it past Eden Prime in ME1, if that were the case.

[Dabrikishaw]

Goneaviking wrote...

Dabrikishaw wrote...

esper wrote...

Official DJ Harbinger wrote...

There needs to be multiple DIFFERENT endings (not the so-called 'different' endings we got with ME3) like this:

Very Worst Ending - You Lose
Bad Ending - You win, but your character dies, along with most of your companions, and the world struggles to rebuild, whether they manage to sustain or not is left to interpretation.
Okay ending - You die, and a few companions do, but the world is saved and there is a clear explanation that there is hope for the future.
Good ending - You sacrifice yourself for everyone else, nearly everyone else lives.
Best ending - You survive, as does your companions (maybe one or two deaths to get the emotions going) and peace is restore forever.

The "Best ending" should be very hard to achieve and regardless of which ending we pick we need to be given multiple different epilogues varying on the choices we've made and lots of CLOSURE for the characters we care about.

This is the thing I NEVER EVER want to see.
This is an rpg, by having endings graded like that. (And now we are not even talking golden ending vs. bittersweet anymore) bioware is effectively stating if you don't do precisly as we imagine you do and take the choice we want you to take, then you don't get the best ending where you win in every possible way.

That will your problem then.

It'll be the problem of anyone who wants endings that make sense based on your choices.

If there's a range of endings it's desirable to have a mix of positive and negative outcomes determined by specific choices, and if some those outcomes are measured subjectively so much the better.

It adds to the replay value and gives an incentive to go back and do things differently.

Blegh, damn my typing.

[New Display Name]

Singular graded endings is a TERRIBLE idea.

Modifié par HJF4, 03 mars 2013 - 10:24 .

[AlanC9]

esper wrote...
Also, while I can see the theory behind the Dark Choice, it doesn't work if the the player/character (depending on level of roleplay) trusts Morrigan. Because that is what the choice boils down to. Trust Morrigan or not. If you do, then it is not really that difficult. And while a question of trust would be interesting in game, it would also be better if the fallout came in that same game.

By "trusts Morrigan" do you mean the PC believes that she's being honest, or believes that she's right? Those are two very different things.

[AlanC9]

SirPetrakus wrote...
I'm not even going to count BG1 and the NWN OC. BG1 because ... well, BG2 and ToB and NWN OC because, quite frankly, it sucked and nobody cared.

Wait... so you count games you like but not games you don't? And BG1 doesn't count because it got a sequel later?

Modifié par AlanC9, 03 mars 2013 - 11:36 .

[Iakus]

Mr.BlazenGlazen wrote...

Don't force a happy ending. Simply make it an option.

Doesn't get much simpler than this.

[Dave of Canada]

I'm reading a few posts in this thread and I'm happy that I'm not the only one who thinks happy endings solve everything, offering it as a choice is idiotic because it often means the ending becomes the default amongst everyone.

Who wanted to pretend they were stupid in the Suicide Mission just to throw drama into it?

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 03 mars 2013 - 11:50 .

[KiwiQuiche]

iakus wrote...

Mr.BlazenGlazen wrote...

Don't force a happy ending. Simply make it an option.

Doesn't get much simpler than this.

+1

[SirPetrakus]

AlanC9 wrote...

SirPetrakus wrote...
I'm not even going to count BG1 and the NWN OC. BG1 because ... well, BG2 and ToB and NWN OC because, quite frankly, it sucked and nobody cared.

Wait... so you count games you like but not games you don't? And BG1 doesn't count because it got a sequel later?

Well, nobody DID care. There was no lasting bond with the NWN characters. They were all pretty generic and forgettable. Not to mention, for a few of them, quite irritating, as well. Besides Aribeth, nothing really came out of the NWN OC. Still, I expected the expansions to elaborate on the OC, which they didn't and that's one reason I never bought or played them. So, I guess, in a way, I really did care.

BG1 was great and I think we all knew a sequel was coming. I mean, the hint at the amount of Bhaalspawns was the BG ending itself. Also wasn't it hailed as the best RPG of its time? Still the attachement to characters didn't come until BG2. Much more fleshed out and expanded on. Plus, the game mechanics allowed for a much more interactive character development and that was the first time I think anyone had seen something like that.