366 réponses à ce sujet

[Il Divo]

Giantdeathrobot wrote...

Dragon Age is not A Song of Ice and Fire (or Game of Thrones for the unsullied among us). Morever (and I say this as a lifelong fan), the serie's penchant for killing characters is kinda overestimated. No spoilers, but not that many characters die. You can easily make more important people die in Origins or Mass Effect 2 than there are casualties among the entire main cast of ASoIaF. Only true difference is the sheer brutality of those kills.

Come again?

I'm inclined to call shenanigans. If you're saying not many POV characters die, agreed. But characters altogether? What Mass Effect 2/DA:O characters are you counting exactly that could compare to the blood count ASolaF has managed to reach?

[Swoopdogg]

Giantdeathrobot wrote...

...

One thing I will say; stop the cop-outs, Bioware. I'm talking about stuff like the Mage resolution to the Redcliffe storyline, or things like the Geth/Quarian conflict having a ''get out of jail free'' card (yes I know not the same team it's just an example). if you're going to push hard choices, don't make a third golden one. The third could be lessened consequences for everybody (as opposed to all the consequences piling up on one party) but a consequence-less choice is no choice. I don't want to get the urge to metagame, knowing that I'm simply doing things wrong right now. The Genophage decision in ME3 is a good example of this, as is the King of Orzammar one. Those are the kind of dilemnas that should be present.

This, basically. The whole Redcliffe thing was a no-brainer, especially when we were already going to Lake Calenhad anyway. It could've been done differently, maybe the village gets attacked again while you're gone and a bunch of innocents die. But it was just like, "lul everyone wins! :DDD"

[Endurium]

Hopefully the game will be a bit less strict about companions than it was in DAO. As a Dark Warden I managed to kill or drive away all of the companions I bothered to pick up (left Sten in cage), but there were glitches, especially with Oghren as Bioware apparently never expected anyone to make him mad enough to leave the group. Heh.

That was a pretty dark playthrough, and I was alone at the coronation (no companions to visit with).

So basically DAO's 'moral' balance with a little more room for player agency regarding companions, and I'd be all set.

Modifié par Endurium, 11 juin 2013 - 10:08 .

[Angrywolves]

No. Again. no.

[Spedfrom]

Knight of Dane wrote...

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.

I agree, death in a RPG doesn't mean anything is it isn't a consequence or a sacrifice from the players decision.

You mustn't have played Final Fantasy VII then. Poor Aerith.

[catharsisboo]

Forced deaths = forced drama = bad. There definitely shouldn't be characters with plot armour unless the devs have a really good reason, but, at the same time, they should be preventable if the player works to save them.

Really, when's the last time you've heard someone lauding Thane's death as "good dark writing"? It was forced drama, especially since it was hinted that a cure for Kepral's was in the works in LotSB, and it backfired.

If you want to kill off companions, by all means, you should have the choice to do so. (I killed off Ashley because drama, but it was ultimately my decision, not something forced on me.) If you want a dark playthrough with people dying left and right, you should have the opportunity to do so. As long as it stays a choice, by all means.

[garrusfan1]

no I am tired of it

[Sir George Parr]

As long as its a choice. Nothing like the railroaded tragedies that happen to the Hawke family.

[Giantdeathrobot]

Il Divo wrote...

Giantdeathrobot wrote...

Dragon Age is not A Song of Ice and Fire (or Game of Thrones for the unsullied among us). Morever (and I say this as a lifelong fan), the serie's penchant for killing characters is kinda overestimated. No spoilers, but not that many characters die. You can easily make more important people die in Origins or Mass Effect 2 than there are casualties among the entire main cast of ASoIaF. Only true difference is the sheer brutality of those kills.

Come again?

I'm inclined to call shenanigans. If you're saying not many POV characters die, agreed. But characters altogether? What Mass Effect 2/DA:O characters are you counting exactly that could compare to the blood count ASolaF has managed to reach?

Main Cast. As in, yeah, POV characters and other important figures like the main bannermen and Varys/Littlefinger. But people are acting like GRRM kills a major character every 50 pages, which is not the case. Also, the last two books have a tendancy towards, let us say, deaths that aren't. I mean, who really cares that The Tickler or some random Frey/slaver/whichever mook dies? We're talking in terms of characters readers take an attachement to.

In Origins, all of your party is killable. The Warden or Alistair can be the last person standing at the epilogue. In ME2 the entire main cast save Liara can kick the bucket. Sure, you have to screw up majorly to get that, but it's still possible. So when people equate dark with bodycount, I call BS.

[thejellnuggz]

Okay so i can't be bothered reading every single post here so i'm just going to state my opinion then lurk elsewhere. (Remember this is all my opinion and I don't expect all of-- or even some of you to agree with me)

Just because DA:I seems like it'd be a dark game doesn't mean we should force how depressing and difficult it is just because of what the game is based around on.

It's okay to want a happy story because, why the f*ck not? Who doesn't want a happy story where the hero gets to live with his LI and friends in some ... tropical ... paradise (???????????????????)

It's also okay to want a sad story, because hey, i like a good cry every now and then too.

BUT, this IS an RPG, we should be given the CHOICE, as consumers, as players, whether or not we want our story to be dark. We can choose to play through as a skeptical... ruthless soldier, who just kills and doesn't trust. We can choose to play as a helpful guardian who refuses to leave anyone behind. We can choose to play as someone who just lurks in the middle, not really on either side, just doing what is needed, not what is wanted.

We shouldn't be forced into a game where we witness all our favourite characters die in front of us, we shouldn't be forced into a game where nothing bad happens ever and everything is just sunshine and bunnies.

The game should have default dark scenarios, things that you can't change no matter what you do simply because the story requires it. But it should also have situations where - if you work hard - you can have that happy ending and you can save that NPC.

Railroading me into some depressing (or happy) story is going to put me off the game. I want choice. It's an RPG, dammit.

[LoonySpectre]

In Origins, all of your party is killable

It's possible to kill Oghren in Origins?

[Grog Muffins]

Giantdeathrobot wrote...

...

One thing I will say; stop the cop-outs, Bioware. I'm talking about stuff like the Mage resolution to the Redcliffe storyline, or things like the Geth/Quarian conflict having a ''get out of jail free'' card (yes I know not the same team it's just an example). if you're going to push hard choices, don't make a third golden one. The third could be lessened consequences for everybody (as opposed to all the consequences piling up on one party) but a consequence-less choice is no choice. I don't want to get the urge to metagame, knowing that I'm simply doing things wrong right now. The Genophage decision in ME3 is a good example of this, as is the King of Orzammar one. Those are the kind of dilemnas that should be present.

I agree on the Redcliffe thing. I always pick it because I'm weak like that (I think I have only one playthrough where I kill Isolde for the blood magic ritual) but I would love to see the consequences of me leaving everything hanging for such a long time (village burnt to the ground, innocents dead etc.).

However, I don't agree on the Quarian/Geth "get out of jail free" card, as you put it. I loved that I had that option. You're in the middle of a galactic extermination and these idiots are fighting over a planet that, in the grand scheme of things, is insignificant. I loved being able to hit them upside the head with how dumb they were being. First deal with Reapers, then bicker over planets like crybabies. It's a very logical reaction to a conflict that doesn't make any difference in the face of the looming mass-extermination that is going on and I liked being able to smack both the Quarians and Geth over the face with that particular notion.

I would have liked to see something like this in Origins, after the duel with Loghain at the Landsmeet. There are only THREE Wardens in all of Ferelden and there is no guarantee that at least one will survive the entire horde and reach the Archdemon and also be able to kill it. It is completely unrealistic. I would have loved the option to try to make Alistair understand that. Use Loghain because we need as many Wardens as possible and, after the Blight is dealt with, try him because he needs to answer for his actions. Again, the conflict of the moment is insignificant when faced with the larger picture, sometimes you need to swallow your pride/morals in order to do the best thing for everyone.

[MWImexico]

personally i've got no problem with the "everybody wins" outcomes (it's nice from times to times, realy) but those outcomes should idealy be the result of a chain of stratégical décisions done before. So as long as you work for it and/or make coherent choices in the long term...why not?

And who want to be stuck with décisions that have only ponctual outcomes? If we can accept the bad concequences in the long term we should also be allowed to hope for the good ones.

Also I liked the landsmeet in DAO, something like that could be intersting en fun.

Modifié par MWImexico, 11 juin 2013 - 11:20 .

[Giantdeathrobot]

LoonySpectre wrote...

In Origins, all of your party is killable

It's possible to kill Oghren in Origins?

Ayup. Get his approval down enough.

[thejellnuggz]

LoonySpectre wrote...

In Origins, all of your party is killable

It's possible to kill Oghren in Origins?

Yes, i think so, if you get enough disapproval he can get fed up and leave. (I think there's an option to just kill him when he tries to leave, I'm not sure though)

[Il Divo]

Note: A Song of Ice and Fire Spoilers incoming.

Giantdeathrobot wrote...

Main Cast. As in, yeah, POV characters and other important figures like the main bannermen and Varys/Littlefinger. But people are acting like GRRM kills a major character every 50 pages, which is not the case. Also, the last two books have a tendancy towards, let us say, deaths that aren't. I mean, who really cares that The Tickler or some random Frey/slaver/whichever mook dies? We're talking in terms of characters readers take an attachement to.

In Origins, all of your party is killable. The Warden or Alistair can be the last person standing at the epilogue. In ME2 the entire main cast save Liara can kick the bucket. Sure, you have to screw up majorly to get that, but it's still possible. So when people equate dark with bodycount, I call BS.

I feel like even this can be misleading. Take characters like Ygritte or Maester Aemon. They have pretty relevant roles while they exist in the novels. Add those on to characters like Eddard, Tywin, Viserys, Robb Stark, Joffrey, and Robert Baratheon. That already puts the body count at 8, which is tied with the number of Origins companions who can be killed (Morrigan can't die).

Not to mention, attachment does not only occur with main characters. Perfect example: Oberyn Martell, my personal favorite character in the entire series. He appears about three-four times before he takes his exit, but he more than makes an impression.

If this is a comparison of Mass Effect 2 companions vs. ASoIaF memorable characters, the former is still going to lose out, simply due to the sheer size of the books, which has given Martin plenty of opportunity to develop characters outside of the POVs and subsequently kill them off.

Modifié par Il Divo, 11 juin 2013 - 11:29 .

[thejellnuggz]

MWImexico wrote...

personally i've got no problem with the "everybody wins" outcomes (it's nice from times to times, realy) but those outcomes should idealy be the result of a chain of stratégical décisions done before. So as long as you work for it and/or make coherent choices in the long term...why not?

And who want to be stuck with décisions that have only ponctual outcomes? If we can accept the bad concequences in the long term we should also be allowed to hope for the good ones.

Also I liked the landsmeet in DAO, something like that could be intersting en fun.

I agree, if we want a happy everybody wins outcome we shouldn't be judged and told that it's unrealistic and that we're childish for wanting a more light-hearted ending. I don't think it should just be handed to us either. We should get the choice of a happy ending if we work hard enough. 

The landsmeet was fun, i'd like something like that to return too 

[mopotter]

Genshie wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Kabraxal wrote...

Give us choice... DAO worked because it could be as dark or "lighter" depending on what you did..

Then why the **** would you take the darker options if you can get a happily-ever after ending?

Same reason why I chose to betray Krogans, kill Mordin, and choose control after promising to destroy the Reapers in ME3. It is different and it is fun to sometimes go against your normal morals.

And because I don't want to play a game where the ending is the same every time.  I want a variety of endings at least two endings with different ways to get there depending on your choices.   Choices where some have a "happy" ending with LI and some friends and some choices where ending is sad and depressing, and maybe some inbetween.

 edit- fingers on wrong key.

Modifié par mopotter, 11 juin 2013 - 11:33 .

[LoonySpectre]

Though if we include DLC, it is possible to get Oghren killed in Awakening.

[Neon Rising Winter]

The feeling of a variety of endings is where I think DA:O stands head and shoulders above most games. Ultimately it's all kill archdemon - roll credits, but it feels like there's a number of substantially different ways to get to that point, and they follow reasonably from the story and the characters, rather than feeling forced for the sake of difference and having happy/sad options.

[MWImexico]

thejellnuggz wrote...

MWImexico wrote...

personally i've got no problem with the "everybody wins" outcomes (it's nice from times to times, realy) but those outcomes should idealy be the result of a chain of stratégical décisions done before. So as long as you work for it and/or make coherent choices in the long term...why not?

And who want to be stuck with décisions that have only ponctual outcomes? If we can accept the bad concequences in the long term we should also be allowed to hope for the good ones.

Also I liked the landsmeet in DAO, something like that could be intersting en fun.

I agree, if we want a happy everybody wins outcome we shouldn't be judged and told that it's unrealistic and that we're childish for wanting a more light-hearted ending. I don't think it should just be handed to us either. We should get the choice of a happy ending if we work hard enough. 

The landsmeet was fun, i'd like something like that to return too 

Well i suppose that in this case (DA:I) the "everybody wins" is gonna be impossible hard to achieve XD hopefully the ending will be the concequence of our choices during the game. Perhaps that's why we liked DAO so much, not (only) because of the dead of the archidemon but because of the epilogues (well said Narrow Margin).
About the characters who died in GoT, perhaps the how many is less important than the why? 

Modifié par MWImexico, 12 juin 2013 - 12:37 .

[Giantdeathrobot]

Spoilers for Game of Thrones and A Song of Ice and Fire, read at your own peril!!

Il Divo wrote...



I feel like even this can be misleading. Take characters like Ygritte or Maester Aemon. They have pretty relevant roles while they exist in the novels. Add those on to characters like Eddard, Tywin, Viserys, Robb Stark, Joffrey, and Robert Baratheon. That already puts the body count at 8, which is tied with the number of Origins companions who can be killed (Morrigan can't die).

Not to mention, attachment does not only occur with main characters. Perfect example: Oberyn Martell, my personal favorite character in the entire series. He appears about three-four times before he takes his exit, but he more than makes an impression.

If this is a comparison of Mass Effect 2 companions vs. ASoIaF memorable characters, the former is still going to lose out, simply due to the sheer size of the books, which has given Martin plenty of opportunity to develop characters outside of the POVs and subsequently kill them off.

Yeah, but as you said that's a question of size. The books have more characters than the game, but the games allow you to kill (almost) the entire main cast, yet the books are most definitely regarded as darker (for good reasons). What makes it dark is the sheer brutality; the Starks are morally upright, but when they screw up the hammer falls and basta, main characters or not. As you said, Oberyn is a badass, but he makes and error and the plot punishes him.

My point is that bodycount doesn't equal darkness. Requiem for a Dream is a very dark movie, yet not many people die. Harry Potter has a whole bunch of character dying (granted, mostly in the seventh book) and nobody will ever say it's a dark series. Warhammer 40k is an incredibly dark setting, but not that many main characters die (in the games or lore I mean).

It's all a question of how it's done. Bioware killing more characters won't make the game darker or better. I think that was Gaider's point anyway.

[Iakus]

mopotter wrote...


And because I don't want to play a game where the ending is the same every time.  I want a variety of endings at least two endings with different ways to get there depending on your choices.   Choices where some have a "happy" ending with LI and some friends and some choices where ending is sad and depressing, and maybe some inbetween.

This.  All of it.

This is choice mattering

[GodWood]

iakus wrote...

mopotter wrote...
And because I don't want to play a game where the ending is the same every time.  I want a variety of endings at least two endings with different ways to get there depending on your choices.   Choices where some have a "happy" ending with LI and some friends and some choices where ending is sad and depressing, and maybe some inbetween.

This.  All of it.

This is choice mattering

This seems to be a view that's especially common amongst the Bioware fanbase. Simply picking whether you want a happy ending or a sad ending is not a good example of choice and consequence. A good example would be two different endings that both have positive qualities and negative qualities which are a direct result of one's actions.

That's choice mattering.

[Ryzaki]

GodWood wrote...

iakus wrote...

mopotter wrote...
And because I don't want to play a game where the ending is the same every time.  I want a variety of endings at least two endings with different ways to get there depending on your choices.   Choices where some have a "happy" ending with LI and some friends and some choices where ending is sad and depressing, and maybe some inbetween.

This.  All of it.

This is choice mattering

This seems to be a view that's especially common amongst the Bioware fanbase. Simply picking whether you want a happy ending or a sad ending is not a good example of choice and consequence. A good example would be two different endings that both have positive qualities and negative qualities which are a direct result of one's actions.

That's choice mattering.

That's less choice mattering and you not wanting people to have their cake and eat it to which...is fair enough.

Not to mention the neutral non braindead solution which is 97% (exaggeration but whatever) of the time missing in games. (Sure in movies and books you can justify it by it not being in character. In a BW RPG...uh...not so much). There some magical reason I can't have Alistair/Wynne head back to the Circle (I already cleared out mind) to get the circle mages while my PC, Sten and Morrigan stay in the castle in case Conner decides to go crazy and put him down? Nope. Most of his forces have been defeated and I have a whole bunch of knights and crap to help. Just...can't. That's why the whole "hard choices" thing doesn't usually work for me. Legion? Dumb. Why can't he wait while the quarians are standing down? (in peace anyway. If you side with the geth I can understand since the Quarians are refusing to stop firing and Legion needs the Geth to be able to defend themselves and has no time for finesse) Mordin works (and is a example of that done well it's either then or never and it having to be manually controlled is a logical outcome. And you can save his life at the cost of the Krogan).. The redcliffe circle choice as a "third option is perfect!" is meh when your options are pretty stupid to begin with and it wouldn't have been difficult to make the "golden" outcome logical.

Sometimes have your cake and eat it choices work. It's not something that should be common sure (because like everything else used in excess it's bad) but that doesn't mean it should be completely absent. Being rewarded is not bad. (The peace option for the elves and werewolves should've been more difficult to reach however. Little too easy to convince the guy) honestly if I'm examining every nook and cranny, doing heaps of sidequests yeah once in a while I wanna nice third option to reward me. *shrugs* Nothing. NOTHING pissed me off as much as having as high EMS I could get in ME3 and still getting...those endings. Did all that scanning all those sidequests...for that crap? Not even that different from the neutral ending. But being forced to choose sucks in one way, sucks in another and no matter what I do it's the same is meh.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 12 juin 2013 - 03:25 .