366 réponses à ce sujet

[Ravensword]

Steelcan wrote...

. Heroism is often contrasted with pragmatism, or an anti-hero. In the past few decades anti-heroes have been the more popular portrayal.

Han Solo, Dirty Harry, Geralt, Malcolm Reynolds (to a degree), Craig's James Bond especially.

You forgot Riddick, Snake Plissken, Tony Soprano, Walter White, etc.

[RedArmyShogun]

I made the kill all LI's before it was cool *hipster shades*

[o Ventus]

Death =/= Dark.

Just saying.

[Enigmatick]

[Spam post removed.]

Modifié par Ninja Stan, 18 juin 2013 - 06:57 .

[Steelcan]

o Ventus wrote...

Death =/= Dark.

Just saying.

.  Given BioWare's latest attempt at forcing in a dark mood through killing a charcatrr, they might as well make it absurdly happy and corny like Citadel DLC.

[Dova]

[Spam post removed.]

Modifié par Ninja Stan, 18 juin 2013 - 06:56 .

[RedArmyShogun]

[Spam post removed.]

Modifié par Ninja Stan, 18 juin 2013 - 06:56 .

[kinderschlager]

 so long as i can perma kill Liliana this time, i'll be happy, hardening her seems to have had no effect, still a preachy choir girl.

must. destroy. chanrty!

[kinderschlager]

[Spam post removed.]



holy crap, i've been ninja edited!

(pokes head in forums, wonders if ninja stan is gone)

love you!

Modifié par kinderschlager, 18 juin 2013 - 06:56 .

[Dave of Canada]

In Exile wrote...

I actually think there was a lot of potential there, she just didn't have a foil. She clearly felt guilty for burdening her family as a mage, and deep down wanted to go to the Circle to "free" them. If she actually interacted with Hawke on this point, you could get a fascinating rivalry path. 

Pretty much how I felt on the matter. She's just... there, she talks about magic being a burden but it's never really explored beyond her words, it's practically impossible to get rivalry with her to the point that it goes into the red, her rivalry path is simply about her hating you, etc.

Had they done more with her, it would've been better. I didn't care too much when I met up with Bethany in the finale, I cared a lot more when Carver stood up to me / for me and we re-united despite our differences.

[Ninja Stan]

Some spam and off-topic discussion removed. Warnings and bans have been handed out.

[Qyla]

Dave of Canada wrote...

In Exile wrote...

I actually think there was a lot of potential there, she just didn't have a foil. She clearly felt guilty for burdening her family as a mage, and deep down wanted to go to the Circle to "free" them. If she actually interacted with Hawke on this point, you could get a fascinating rivalry path. 

Pretty much how I felt on the matter. She's just... there, she talks about magic being a burden but it's never really explored beyond her words, it's practically impossible to get rivalry with her to the point that it goes into the red, her rivalry path is simply about her hating you, etc.

Had they done more with her, it would've been better. I didn't care too much when I met up with Bethany in the finale, I cared a lot more when Carver stood up to me / for me and we re-united despite our differences.

I'm not for "antagonist character=more interesting character". Carver hates you because is envious, and tries to get out of your shadow. Is there something more I am missing?

[Volus Warlord]

We'll almost certainly have a starter companion that dies. Is that close enough?

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

I want the whole game to be like collector base AKA suicide mission.

[Dova]

Legatus Arianus wrote...

I want the whole game to be like collector base AKA suicide mission.

This. This would be a  good idea. 

[Neon Rising Winter]

You know what I'd like to see, instead of you having to make a choice whether to kill a companion or not, they had to make a choice whether to kill you, their decision depending on your behaviour and actions. Obviously this would need to be at the end of the game as it might make further progress difficult, but I think it's time the NPCs were given the chance to get their own back.

[Dova]

Narrow Margin wrote...

You know what I'd like to see, instead of you having to make a choice whether to kill a companion or not, they had to make a choice whether to kill you, their decision depending on your behaviour and actions. Obviously this would need to be at the end of the game as it might make further progress difficult, but I think it's time the NPCs were given the chance to get their own back.

Pretty much like DA:2 if you side with the Templars, Anders will want to kill you; Mages Fenris will ; And if you spare Anders Sebastian rages and goes back to Starkhaven. 

Like that?

[Neon Rising Winter]

Dovaaa wrote...

Narrow Margin wrote...

You know what I'd like to see, instead of you having to make a choice whether to kill a companion or not, they had to make a choice whether to kill you, their decision depending on your behaviour and actions. Obviously this would need to be at the end of the game as it might make further progress difficult, but I think it's time the NPCs were given the chance to get their own back.

Pretty much like DA:2 if you side with the Templars, Anders will want to kill you; Mages Fenris will ; And if you spare Anders Sebastian rages and goes back to Starkhaven. 

Like that?

Not at all. Of those three only Fenris attempts anything - unless you count Anders or Sebastian trying to give you terminal earache - and in the unlikely event he succeeds nothing happens except a reload. No, what I mean is they can kill you off and it is a genuine part of the story.

Modifié par Narrow Margin, 18 juin 2013 - 07:38 .

[Cainhurst Crow]

Ravensword wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

. Heroism is often contrasted with pragmatism, or an anti-hero. In the past few decades anti-heroes have been the more popular portrayal.

Han Solo, Dirty Harry, Geralt, Malcolm Reynolds (to a degree), Craig's James Bond especially.

You forgot Riddick, Snake Plissken, Tony Soprano, Walter White, etc.

There needs to be a balance however. And I question whether there are many people who actually realize that all these anti-heros are still following the heroism path.

[EvilChani]

wright1978 wrote...

Disagree death needs to come down to consequences of choices given it is an rpg. I don't railroaded deaths for previous companions/LI's/protaganists.

^This a trillion times over. The whole point of an RPG is that your character can afffect things. Yes, there should be some things your character cannot change (there was going to be a mage/templar war no matter whose side you chose), and I can even accept making some hard choices (like in ME1 when you had to choose whether to save Kaidan or Ash), but the idea of forced deaths needs to go. That was part of what ruined ME3 for me (it would not have been that hard to give Shepard the choice to go after a cure for Thane but have to forego saving someone else or another planet, rather than forcing his pointless death on us...and don't get me started about the god-powered brat at the end and your "choices" with that). If DA3 goes that route, I want no part of it.

I want a shot at a corny, happy ending where everyone I want to survive manages to survive, even if I have to jump through a thousand hoops to get it. Everyone else can keep their depressofests and misery, if that's what they choose...I wouldn't deprive them of sadness and misery if that's the path they want to take, but I expect not to be deprived of my fairy tale ending either. And anyone who has a problem with there being a path to a happy ending is just a selfish douchebag, IMO.