1082 réponses à ce sujet

[KiwiQuiche]

IanPolaris wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Though apparently being completely retarded and insane is a Kirkwall thing due to Tevinter crap. :| Wooo, nice explanation, Bioware.

Yeah and it's an explaination that Bioware tries to hide in some very obscure and hard to find codex entries.

-Polaris

You figured they would be more obvious about it to make the player stop hating both sides due to their dumbassery.

[Medhia Nox]

@IanPolaris: But what does it matter? Mage supporters ignore (or worse, support) every depraved act mages have been shown to do in these games.  And it isn't the same for the Templar supporters - nobody I know on here supports the rapist Templar (Alrik?) - but Anders commits an act of terrorism and everyone's like "Yeah, I'd do that too!"  To me - that's twisted.

Instead of coming to the conclusion that mages might actually have something very wrong with them in the Dragon Age world - the conclusion is instead: Being angry gives you the right to commit any sort of depraved act and I find that totally moral and justified.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 31 mai 2013 - 12:08 .

[IanPolaris]

Filament wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

I'll agree that both sides were presented badly (and I have already said as much), but the key difference is this:

We never see the Templars abusing mages, or doing various vile things.  We only hear about them.  OTOH, the player is virtually forcefed a diet of crazy mages that do the most vile things (or try to) right in front of you, and force you to fight them (Tarhone and Franken-Mommy come immediately to mind).  Come on, if Fankenmommy wasn't a naked appeal to get the player to hate mages, then what was it?

This is stacking the deck.

-Polaris

We do see Alrik, Kerras, Varnell, and those templars who tortured the elf in various states of villainy. Well, Kerras is only spoken of, but it's not hard to believe with how much of an ass he is. And yeah, Varnell and the elf torture templars had different beefs than mages, per se.

Do we?  Do we actually see Templars killing civilians (non-mage relatives of mages).  Do we actually see Ser Alrik engage in depravities with Ella?  Yes I know it's strongly implied, but it's never shown.

OTOH, what the mage villians/enemies do is paraded in front of the player constantly.  It's stacking the deck.

But I would say that the atmosphere of abuse in the Gallows is something DA2 did get right, even if individual characters were a bit hard to take seriously and most of the abuse went unseen.

I don't disagree, but if the issue is genuinely morally grey (and this I dispute) and if you want to present the issue to the player honestly then both sides must be presented honestly, and that means not stacking the deck the way I've said.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@IanPolaris: But what does it matter? Mage supporters ignore (or worse, support) every depraved act mages have been shown to do in these games.  And it isn't the same for the Templar supporters - nobody I know on here supports the rapist Templar (Alrik?) - but Anders commits an act of terrorism and everyone's like "Yeah, I'd do that too!"  To me - that's twisted.

I'd be careful with those generalizations.  I personally kill Anders every time and I've never supported what he did to the Cathedral, and I've called it an act of terrorism more than once.  You can't put all mage supporters in a single group like this.  It's lazy rhetoric and unfair.

Instead of coming to the conclusion that mages might actually have something very wrong with them in the Dragon Age world - the conclusion is instead: Being angry gives you the right to commit any sort of depraved act and I find that totally moral and justified.

I have never said that some mages go too far, or that magic didn't need to be regulated and controlled.  Most reasonable mage supporters have said as much, but ...and I know this may shock you.... but if you treat people like animals, then you should be suprised if they act like animals.  Whose to blame for that?  I think that answer is clear.    That in no way absolves the individual of their choices, but it does present a grimmer picture of what's happening, and it's one reason why I don't think this is actually a grey moral issue, and thus a writing failure on the part of Bioware.

-Polaris

[Nightdragon8]

KiwiQuiche wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Though apparently being completely retarded and insane is a Kirkwall thing due to Tevinter crap. :| Wooo, nice explanation, Bioware.

Yeah and it's an explaination that Bioware tries to hide in some very obscure and hard to find codex entries.

-Polaris

You figured they would be more obvious about it to make the player stop hating both sides due to their dumbassery.

which doesn't make what people are saying any less valid. Also why should they make getting some infomation easy? I'm sick of hand holding. Sure give us a tutorial then let us figure the rest out. I mean if anything it encourges people to communicate with people over the forums. *Gasp* what a novel idea...

sorry laying the sarcasim alittle thick there, but still just because it isn't freely given to you, doesn't mean its invaild infomation.

[KiwiQuiche]

People like generalizing in BSN, Polaris. One of the first things I learned here. But I'm with you on the Anders thing; most of my Hawkes kill Anders. It's only the totally sympathetic or fanatic ones who let him live, all the other give him a stabbing. And I'm all ready to kick some Templar ass in DAI.

But it's obvious that the entire system needs to be removed. Personally I'm impressed it managed to last 900 years without this mass rebelling taking place.

[KiwiQuiche]

Nightdragon8 wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Though apparently being completely retarded and insane is a Kirkwall thing due to Tevinter crap. :| Wooo, nice explanation, Bioware.

Yeah and it's an explaination that Bioware tries to hide in some very obscure and hard to find codex entries.

-Polaris

You figured they would be more obvious about it to make the player stop hating both sides due to their dumbassery.

which doesn't make what people are saying any less valid. Also why should they make getting some infomation easy? I'm sick of hand holding. Sure give us a tutorial then let us figure the rest out. I mean if anything it encourges people to communicate with people over the forums. *Gasp* what a novel idea...

sorry laying the sarcasim alittle thick there, but still just because it isn't freely given to you, doesn't mean its invaild infomation.

And where did I say it was invalid information? I didn't, I just said it was a fairly lazy writing and made it seem like everyone just went insane for no reason due to finding the codex parts was really damn hard.

[berelinde]

KiwiQuiche wrote...


Though apparently being completely retarded and insane is a Kirkwall thing due to Tevinter crap. :| Wooo, nice explanation, Bioware.

Lately, I've been trying to stay out of threads like this because it usually degenerates into rubbish pretty quickly, but I would like to point out that that the lore here isn't necessarily about the Tevinters.

The devs created the lore so that massive violence weakens the Veil. A *lot* of people believe that paranormal activity is greater near old battlefields or places where particularly gruesome crimes have taken place, so this concept isn't too much of a reach. As it happens, Tevinter culture did not place much value on the lives of slaves, so they were particularly brutal toward them. Since quaries require a lot of slaves, a lot of this was happening in Kirkwall. The Veil weakened, and wonky stuff just kept happening.

Plus, there are still a lot of things we don't know about elecrtromagnetic fields. Anectdoatal evidence suggests that large utility substations are responsible for pockets of cancer, anxiety disorders, and other health problems. Not scientifically proven, but it would be hard to study the phenomenon for a number of ethical and practical reasons. Also, house pets seem sensitive to big storm systems, even before they occur. If the instability of the Veil was analogous to an electromagnetic field, that might explain some of Kirkwall's problems.

In other words, I don't find BioWare's explanation clumsy at all. As always, YMMV

[IanPolaris]

KiwiQuiche wrote...

And where did I say it was invalid information? I didn't, I just said it was a fairly lazy writing and made it seem like everyone just went insane for no reason due to finding the codex parts was really damn hard.

That was really my point as well, and not only do I consider it lazy writing, I also consider it dishonest.  Basically the writers in DA2 want to suggest that things are true about mages and magic in general that aren't generally true, but a new player would have no way to know this without doing a lot of digging that a new player is unlikely to do (heck even experienced players will often miss the obsure codex entries and not realize what they mean).  This gives a (deliberately IMHO) false impression.  In short, it's yet another way to stack the deck.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

berelinde wrote...
In other words, I don't find BioWare's explanation clumsy at all. As always, YMMV

I think you are missing the point.  The explaination makes at least a certain amount of surface sense, but the game makes it extremely easy for even an experienced player to miss this crucial detail about Kirkwall (that the Veil is so razor thing that demons can actually cross on their own and the normal rules of mages and magic don't always apply....see Lady Harriman who was not a mage but was granted the powers of one by a desire demon that was able to cross the viel where it was basically non-existent in her basement).

Hiding evidence like this is dishonest.

-Polaris

[berelinde]

IanPolaris wrote...

berelinde wrote...
In other words, I don't find BioWare's explanation clumsy at all. As always, YMMV

I think you are missing the point.  The explaination makes at least a certain amount of surface sense, but the game makes it extremely easy for even an experienced player to miss this crucial detail about Kirkwall (that the Veil is so razor thing that demons can actually cross on their own and the normal rules of mages and magic don't always apply....see Lady Harriman who was not a mage but was granted the powers of one by a desire demon that was able to cross the viel where it was basically non-existent in her basement).

Hiding evidence like this is dishonest.

-Polaris

Hey, if I was able to figure it out, it can't be buried too deeply. 

[Gileadan]

I wonder why someone would keep a mage circle going in a place where the Veil is so thin. It's like building a hospital inside a burnt-out reactor and then acting surprised that no one gets better.

I think the writing just wasn't that great in DA2, overall, and anything learned in that game should be taken with a pinch of salt, be it about mages, templars or qunari.

[IanPolaris]

berelinde wrote...

Hey, if I was able to figure it out, it can't be buried too deeply. 

I dispute this.  The fact that you are here at all on BSN means that you are probably more aware of the game and it's lore than most that play.  On BSN the fact that Kirkwall is essentially a Hellmouth is common knowledge and the existance of these codex entries is fairly well known (Enigma of Kirkwall).

I question how common or easy this knowledge is to one that isn't looking for it.  Frankly, it's knowledge that should be commonly known and commented on but isn't (it's not like a thin viel is hard to notice and doesn't have real effects.  Fenris who is no mage can sense the thin viel on top of Mt Sundermount instantly.)

Thus I believe that this was part of 'stacking the deck' and this a less-then-honest presentation of the game world to the player.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

Gileadan wrote...

I wonder why someone would keep a mage circle going in a place where the Veil is so thin. It's like building a hospital inside a burnt-out reactor and then acting surprised that no one gets better.

I think the writing just wasn't that great in DA2, overall, and anything learned in that game should be taken with a pinch of salt, be it about mages, templars or qunari.

Supposedly it's some deep dark secret that is only known at the highest levels of the Chantry (and only then incompletely).

However, that explaination doesn't come close to surviving the light of day.  A thin veil is noticable and putting a bunch of mages in such a place is indeed like building a hospital in Chernobyl.  So why do it?  I think it was done deliberately to justify presenting mages in the worst possible light while playing fast and loose with the existing lore.

-Polaris

[Ieldra]

Ausstig wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...
"they're not all bad" (qunari). and hate would-be conquerors (qunari). the good side of the qunari need to be shown - and shown in a manner that leaves no doubt that they exist. But the fact that the writing team wants to bring this home to even the most biased or oblivious player results in overstressing the point - and we get DA2's portrayal of mages and MotA's forced complicity in a qunari plot.

When were the Qunari shown as bad?

I hate how everyone (except the oh so evil Sister Petrice) likes them. Alister reaches out to them, the Arishock is shown as being pushed, the Vicount's son loves them, he is also made to look very sympathic to modern views. And Hawk sides with them, always in the case MotA and by defult (unless you are very agressive) in the main game.

When were they shown as bad? Well, when Sten admits that they'll eventually come conquering. When it is pointed out that people in their domains who don't agree with their philosophy are brainwashed to become good little followers? This may be too subtle for some people, but this is actually worse than the slavery in Tevinter, right on track with mind-control by blood magic.

[brushyourteeth]

I can't believe this topic is even a thing.

Meredith, Alrik, Varnell, Lambert, DA:O ptsd!Cullen, all portrayed as evil or unhinged. Not to mention that the Templar Order as a whole has a pretty unpleasant place in society. Nothing like taking kids away from their homes and killing people for trying to live free lives to make you look like a hero. (/sarcasm)

[Lotion Soronarr]

You talk about stacking the deck, yet 99% of all mages gone crazy is either so deliberately over the top that most players won't be able to take it seriously (or the player will deliberately and defiantly refuse to acknowledge it and suport mages even harder... something that ironicly happens often when peopel confronted with evidence fall back even deeper into their entrenched position) OR it is excusable with the "templars caused all of this" handwave.

I look at DA2 and I see it as deliberately stacking the deck against templars. Because siding with them really is presented as downright evil. Mages in comparison just appear sloppily written.


What DA needs more off is scenarios with mages abusing and falling to temptation by the nature of their own free will and the temptation that is magic. More scenarios like Connor.
DA needs to show the danger free mages present, the danger of mages without the circle.


How can you even talk about stacking the deck agains mages when so many (including you) consider templars to be the ultimate bad guys? If anytihng, all it proves is that the deck wasn't stacked enough.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 31 mai 2013 - 01:39 .

[Lt_Riley]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
You're assuming that the PC is meant to be the reasonable looking one
here. From the Codex entry on abominations, and the fact that if memory
serves he specifically mentions a horde of the creatures he was ready
for two of, I don't think the devs were trying to make him look like he
was at all overreacting.

I'm not assuming anything. The PC doesn't matter; the shocked response tones however show that the writers were trying to portray gregoir as somewhat callous for having locked all mages behind the doors, without attempting to look for innocence.

Okay, but I think Dave has it when he mentions Templar abuses and mage heroism, and says that you don't see that both sides are meant to have a point.

No polaris post had it right. Both sides having a base point for fighting was never in question.

[garrusfan1]

Lt_Riley wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

It most certainly does not, the one who actually kills the person commits the greater act.

Indeed it does. If you know innocent people are going to be killed by a madman and you just sit on your hands and do nothing while the act comes to pass, then you're just as big a monster as they are. Even bigger because you could've altered the fate of those innocent people but you chose not to. Anyone mage/templar/ect who doesn't come forward with dangerous knowledge deserves to hang at the gallows right next to the criminal.

what if you have a family and they don't catch the crazy and he is loose for a while. he is gonna want revenge and your family will take the hit for  you doing the right thing. should they yes but fear of what will happen will make you too scared too.

[garrusfan1]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@IanPolaris: But what does it matter? Mage supporters ignore (or worse, support) every depraved act mages have been shown to do in these games.  And it isn't the same for the Templar supporters - nobody I know on here supports the rapist Templar (Alrik?) - but Anders commits an act of terrorism and everyone's like "Yeah, I'd do that too!"  To me - that's twisted.

Instead of coming to the conclusion that mages might actually have something very wrong with them in the Dragon Age world - the conclusion is instead: Being angry gives you the right to commit any sort of depraved act and I find that totally moral and justified.

well I am pro mage and I have to say I thought anders was a dumba**. most people think what anders did was dumb. if you mean when the random mages to blood magic and turn into abominations or go to demons for help most don't agree but realize that if the mages weren't so desperate and treated so badly they wouldn't do that for the most part

[Lt_Riley]

brushyourteeth wrote...

I can't believe this topic is even a thing.

Meredith, Alrik, Varnell, Lambert, DA:O ptsd!Cullen, all portrayed as evil or unhinged. Not to mention that the Templar Order as a whole has a pretty unpleasant place in society. Nothing like taking kids away from their homes and killing people for trying to live free lives to make you look like a hero. (/sarcasm)

It's this kind of baseline black/white good/evil reasoning I abhor. You imply it's evil to take a child from their family, simply because it's a child and killing people who want their freedom is evil simply because the Ideal is a noble one.  What if this child is a dangerous dreamer on the verge of becoming a god like abomination as Feynriel was or an emotionally unstable child who consorted with demons as connor was? Is it evil to remove threats like that before they become problems for an innocent society? I think not. Remember that village of innocent connor whole sale slaughtered because his mother didn't want him to leave his family? Yeah. IIrc Islode not wanting to give connor to the circle cost kaitlin and her brother their mother as well as many other children in the chantry. Both are excellent testaments to just how horrid basing a moral decision on it simply being a child is.

And what of these people who want their freedom? What means are they using to attain this freedom? Black sorcery? Consorting with demons? Raising the dead from their rest, as grace and her fellows were, in the name of freedom? All these factors need to be taken in to account on the moral scale, because the ends do not always justify the means.

[garrusfan1]

garrusfan1 wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

@IanPolaris: But what does it matter? Mage supporters ignore (or worse, support) every depraved act mages have been shown to do in these games.  And it isn't the same for the Templar supporters - nobody I know on here supports the rapist Templar (Alrik?) - but Anders commits an act of terrorism and everyone's like "Yeah, I'd do that too!"  To me - that's twisted.

Instead of coming to the conclusion that mages might actually have something very wrong with them in the Dragon Age world - the conclusion is instead: Being angry gives you the right to commit any sort of depraved act and I find that totally moral and justified.

well I am pro mage and I have to say I thought anders was a dumba**. most people think what anders did was dumb. if you mean when the random mages to blood magic and turn into abominations or go to demons for help most don't agree but realize that if the mages weren't so desperate and treated so badly they wouldn't do that for the most part

I don't think it is right that they do bad things sometimes but non mages do as well. the elven mage that meredith has us chase in act 3 that kills his wife for no reason was just sick and stupid and I think he was not justified in any way. the mage that helped the refugees though and surrendered to the templars and thought they would help the refugees if she surrenedered was more of a she just lost it because after all she did to help them and do good it gets thrown away

[garrusfan1]

Lt_Riley wrote...

brushyourteeth wrote...

I can't believe this topic is even a thing.

Meredith, Alrik, Varnell, Lambert, DA:O ptsd!Cullen, all portrayed as evil or unhinged. Not to mention that the Templar Order as a whole has a pretty unpleasant place in society. Nothing like taking kids away from their homes and killing people for trying to live free lives to make you look like a hero. (/sarcasm)

It's this kind of baseline black/white good/evil reasoning I abhor. You imply it's evil to take a child from their family, simply because it's a child and killing people who want their freedom is evil simply because the Ideal is a noble one.  What if this child is a dangerous dreamer on the verge of becoming a god like abomination as Feynriel was or an emotionally unstable child who consorted with demons as connor was? Is it evil to remove threats like that before they become problems for an innocent society? I think not. Remember that village of innocent connor whole sale slaughtered because his mother didn't want him to leave his family? Yeah. IIrc Islode not wanting to give connor to the circle cost kaitlin and her brother their mother as well as many other children in the chantry. Both are excellent testaments to just how horrid basing a moral decision on it simply being a child is.

And what of these people who want their freedom? What means are they using to attain this freedom? Black sorcery? Consorting with demons? Raising the dead from their rest, as grace and her fellows were, in the name of freedom? All these factors need to be taken in to account on the moral scale, because the ends do not always justify the means.

they should have mandatory training but they should not be torn out of their parents arms. I think they should have to go somewhere to get training and such but the family should be allowed to come as well and it should be more like school where they can leave at the end of the day. the they shouldn't be punished for being born

[berelinde]

IanPolaris wrote...

berelinde wrote...

Hey, if I was able to figure it out, it can't be buried too deeply. 

I dispute this.  The fact that you are here at all on BSN means that you are probably more aware of the game and it's lore than most that play.  On BSN the fact that Kirkwall is essentially a Hellmouth is common knowledge and the existance of these codex entries is fairly well known (Enigma of Kirkwall).

I question how common or easy this knowledge is to one that isn't looking for it.  Frankly, it's knowledge that should be commonly known and commented on but isn't (it's not like a thin viel is hard to notice and doesn't have real effects.  Fenris who is no mage can sense the thin viel on top of Mt Sundermount instantly.)

Thus I believe that this was part of 'stacking the deck' and this a less-then-honest presentation of the game world to the player.

-Polaris

It would be great if everybody was really interested in the lore and wanted to listen to exposition and explanation as in-game dialogue. It would be great if our characters could ask for elaboration every time they are presented with an unfamiliar topic. But the truth is that even if such a thing were economically possible - the cost for all that voicing would be staggering - it might not be desirable. Not everybody who enjoys the series appreciates the lore to the same degree. Some just want to play the game and blow up darkspawn/templars/mages without delving into the backstory, and their money is just as good as yours and mine. Plus, tell me honestly, do you really enjoy listening to Merrill tell Dog the story of the Dread Wolf on your 9th playthrough? I think the current system where the important parts are covered in dialogue but the exposition is handled by the Codex is a good compromise.

Your concern is that the current system is introducing a bias, that players who don't bother to read the Codex are missing vital information that will influence their opinions. They aren't. By the time people are playing Dragon Age, their beliefs and values are already formed. They may not know about magic, templars, the Veil, or the Fade, but they know about freedom, responsibility, and public safety, and they probably have opinions about them already. And it's human nature to remember facts and trivia that support opinions people already hold. Is it necessary to know all the facts to form an opinion? Certainly not. People do it all the time. It is necessary to form a well-informed opinion, and arguments are more persuasive when they have some meat to them, but if the player isn't interested in these things, "Because the devs said so" will do. You've been on BSN long enough to know that an informed debate is a lot more interesting and more entertaining than a few people throwing obscenities at each other, but it's pretty rare for people to actually change their minds over it.

I'm not saying that the details - the lore - shouldn't be there for people who are interested in that. The Codex makes great reading material for solitary meals or for times when you have ten minutes to spare but don't want to get involved in any big game plots at the moment. I do think that placing too heavy emphasis on lore at the expense of pacing would be harmful.

Edited for grammar.

Modifié par berelinde, 31 mai 2013 - 03:02 .