1981 réponses à ce sujet

[Silfren]

Hazegurl wrote...

EJ107 wrote...
 He shows no sign of caring for anyone in the world outside of other mages and those who agree entirely with his view about mage freedom. 

Actually he doesn't even care about mages considering the fact that he does/almost kills one.

I wish people would stop ignoring the context of that confrontation.  Anders didn't almost kill Ella because he just bloody well wanted to kill her, and this certainly CANNOT be used to argue that he doesn't care about mages.  Justice was in control at that moment, not Anders, and he was blinded by his belief that her fear of him meant that she had been "lost" to templar brainwashing or somesuch.

[Silfren]

Angrywolves wrote...

Anders being retconned from his Awakening personality hurt his reception . That's a lesson for Gaider and Laidlaw, don't change character personalities from game to game.
I hated Anders when I learned what he had did. He got the murder knife. I've DAO 15 or 16 times, while I've played DA2 twice.
A lesson for Bioware. shrugs.

That was not a retcon, though.  It was the perfectly natural evolution of a man who was possessed by a single-minded spirit.

[HiroVoid]

Silfren wrote...

Angrywolves wrote...

Anders being retconned from his Awakening personality hurt his reception . That's a lesson for Gaider and Laidlaw, don't change character personalities from game to game.
I hated Anders when I learned what he had did. He got the murder knife. I've DAO 15 or 16 times, while I've played DA2 twice.
A lesson for Bioware. shrugs.

That was not a retcon, though.  It was the perfectly natural evolution of a man who was possessed by a single-minded spirit.

Eh.  Gaider, while thinking it was a fine evolution, did admit that one of the things they may have changed was making him more like he was in Awakening at the start of II.

[Silfren]

Jaulen wrote...

Peer of the Empire wrote...

 it is annoying to be hit on by same sex characters.  That is what has affected characterization

That is the gist of it.  No one is interested in navel gazing with you

Why?

Why is it annoying to be hit on by a character of the same sex, instead of one of the opposite sex?

I find that it's pretty much always straight guys who say this.  Because they have to frame the argument in a way so that they don't have to consider that the same behavior they consider off-putting and creepy might not apply to THEM when they hit on women, yanno.

[Silfren]

Morocco Mole wrote...

I don't think it's any different then a woman being offput by being asked out by a man she isn't interested in or a man being offput by being asked out by a woman he isn't interested in. It makes people uncomfortable, especially when a man would never date a man or a woman would never date a woman. It's all about awkward discomfort.

Exactly. Unless someone is shouting actual bigoted slurs then it is perfectly acceptable for a straight person to be uncomfortable about a gay person hitting on them. And vice versa.

What's being missed here is the that the way people FRAME not wanting to be hit on by someone of their own gender smacks very much of homophobia. 

Too often, the response isn't "I'm sorry, but I'm not interested," or even "thank you but I'm not interested in x," and leaving it at that, but "OMFG I DON'T WANT SOME GAY PERSON HITTING ON ME EW EW EW."  The former is polite and decent, but the latter absolutely reflects homophobia.  

Therein lies the problem.  You're (general you, not aimed at anyone) not upset or uncomfortable because you were hit on, but because you were hit on by the wrong gender.  You're not required to go into a shpiel with someone about how you're just not into whatever gender they are; a simple "Thanks but no thanks," is plenty sufficient.  If that person persists, then it becomes NOT about them being an icky LGBT person who cries homophobia for being put down, but about that person being a rude, entitled jerk who can't take no for an answer. 

But that is NOT how things are being framed, and it's not the way such situations usually go down.

[Silfren]

Angrywolves wrote...

uh no they weren't . The characters in DA2 were poorly written. The discussion doesn't have to accomplish anything . shrugs.

Matter of opinion.  Many of us think the DA2 characters were superbly well written. 

Why do you bother with this thread if you aren't interested in having a proper discussion?  Or will you just shrug that away, too?

[Rawgrim]

If you are straight, and a gay person hits on you, take it as a compliment. Its that simple.

[Silfren]

HiroVoid wrote...

Actually, the mechanic DOES in fact punish going back and forth rather than trying to purposely go in one direction. Chances are that's why it's being revamped again in DA:I.

Edit: ......You might want to cool it down with the five replies in a row, Silf.

Excuse me?  I reply to posts one at a time, and always have.  That they happen to end up consecutively because nobody else is posting at the time is not my problem. 

[Lebanese Dude]

Rawgrim wrote...

If you are straight, and a gay person hits on you, take it as a compliment. Its that simple.

This is how it should be in the future.

However, we have to remember that we live in a day and age that is just starting to accept non-heterosexual identities.

Some people have an ingrained homophobia that is, frankly speaking, not going to go away easily. Even people who would gladly speak out in favor of gay people might still get uncomfortable with it. 

What can be changed, however, is their reaction to that situation.

[Silfren]

Lebdood wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

If you are straight, and a gay person hits on you, take it as a compliment. Its that simple.

This is how it should be in the future.

However, we have to remember that we live in a day and age that is just starting to accept non-heterosexual identities.

Some people have an ingrained homophobia that is, frankly speaking, not going to go away easily. Even people who would gladly speak out in favor of gay people might still get uncomfortable with it. 

What can be changed, however, is their reaction to that situation.

And that, I think, is the salient point.  There's no harm in being uncomfortable in that kind of situation. You can be uncomfortable with the idea of being hit on by someone for whatever reason.  People's feelings, after all, are their own and cannot be controlled with a switch.  However, most people do have the ability to prevent themselves from reacting with unwarranted anger or hostility, and that is what makes the difference.  It helps, also, to be mature enough to recognize the discomfort for what it is, and not to act like the damned world is ending because someone of your own gender tried to flirt with you. 

Modifié par Silfren, 01 décembre 2013 - 03:03 .

[Angrywolves]

Well friend Silfren many fans think the DA2 characters were poorly written and the fact you like them is your opinion .
This is a DAI forum not a DA2 forum in case you've forgotten. shrugs and smiles.

[Angrywolves]

But you can like the DA2 characters . No harm in that.

[Silfren]

Angrywolves wrote...

Well friend Silfren many fans think the DA2 characters were poorly written and the fact you like them is your opinion .
This is a DAI forum not a DA2 forum in case you've forgotten. shrugs and smiles.

And I wasn't the one who was expressing an opinion as a fact; that was all you.  As for it being a DA:I forum and not a DA2 one, I fail to see what your point is since you've been adding to the DA2 discussion yourself, if you can call your pointless one-liners as such.

Modifié par Silfren, 01 décembre 2013 - 03:22 .

[zMataxa]

Silfren wrote...

Angrywolves wrote...

uh no they weren't . The characters in DA2 were poorly written. The discussion doesn't have to accomplish anything . shrugs.

Matter of opinion.  Many of us think the DA2 characters were superbly well written. 

Why do you bother with this thread if you aren't interested in having a proper discussion?  Or will you just shrug that away, too?

____________

+1
It's remarkable how some BSNers ignore the reality that "what doesn't float your boat, may float anothers", even after having read many posts confirming that.
Sure, it can be debated whether character consistency is critical through various instalments.
It's not one of my worries.  I evaluate every game on it's own merit.

DAO's Merril vs DA2's Merril.  Frankly, I didn't see that much of Merril in DAO.  So, I had no problem adjusting to DA2 Merril.  I thought she was a fascinating fantasy character.  If i want normal - I see my friends and family in RL.  But that's just my preference - so lucky me that Bioware delivers.

As for Anders, seriously I think some of you should consider just seeing him as "a story tool" that you don't like, but it serves a dramatic purpose.  I thought the character of Anders (with his spirit) was another fascinating character to bring the whole story to life.  

For more normal tastes, I think you could be just fine with Aveline and Varric as companions, and add a third that you can tolerate.  I think Bioware provided pretty awesome options encompassing quite a range in both DAO and DA2.  So very very promising for  DAI.
 

Modifié par zMataxa, 01 décembre 2013 - 03:27 .

[wolfhowwl]

zMataxa wrote...
DAO's Merril vs DA2's Merril.  Frankly, I
didn't see that much of Merril in DAO.  So, I had no problem adjusting to DA2 Merril.  I thought she was a fascinating fantasy character.  If i want normal - I see my friends and family in RL.  But that's just my preference - so lucky me that Bioware delivers.

Merrill should have been a new character.

zMataxa wrote...
As for Anders, seriously I think some of you should consider just seeing him as "a story tool" that you don't like, but it serves a dramatic purpose.  I thought the character of Anders (with his spirit) was another fascinating character to bring the whole story to life.  

Interesting ideas, bad implementation. I hope that with more development time they would have been able to give Anders' transformation the attention it deserved. Alas...

Heh, saying that people should view him as a "story tool" is fitting since Anders was a victim of a poorly written and railroaded plot.

Modifié par wolfhowwl, 01 décembre 2013 - 04:24 .

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

Merrill should have died.

[wolfhowwl]

There should have been an option to hand her over to the Dalish.

[Statare]

wolfhowwl wrote...

Merrill should have been a new character.

Um. It kind of had to be Merrill. Only one other Dalish clan would have served to link DAII with Origins. No other Dalish clan had an experience with an Eluvian. Few other Dalish clans would have seemed so naturally to have met with Flemeth in Ferelden and then traveled to Sundermount. The Sabrae clan being the Dalish clan of DAII made sense for DAII's plot. As there is only ever one First you have Merrill. A new character would have been a missed opportunity to further develop plots and characters begun in Origins. 

Heh, saying that people should view him as a "story tool" is fitting since Anders was a victim of a poorly written and railroaded plot.

If you pay attention, Anders makes it pretty clear since the beginning of DAII that something extreme might happen. Flemeth even foreshadows what will happen. It was not "railroaded". It developed over the course of the game and felt organic. Anders gets moodier and moodier with every progressing Act, implying he's becomming desperate. Contrary to being random or disastorous, Anders role could even be argued to be pretty well written and developed.

The person you are quoting is saying that people who dislike the character of Anders for blowing up the Chantry should consider viewng him as an element of the plot that allows the story to progress. Like when Snape kills Dumbledore or something. You may not like it, but it happened, and now you have to deal with it. Unfortunately, people feel like companions should do exactly what they want them to do, which would make for a static story. On the one hand, they want well written characters, but on the other hand they don't want characters who do things they don't want them to. 

[zMataxa]

wolfhowwl wrote...

zMataxa wrote...
As for Anders, seriously I think some of you should consider just seeing him as "a story tool" that you don't like, but it serves a dramatic purpose.  I thought the character of Anders (with his spirit) was another fascinating character to bring the whole story to life.  

Interesting ideas, bad implementation. I hope that with more development time they would have been able to give Anders' transformation the attention it deserved. Alas...

Heh, saying that people should view him as a "story tool" is fitting since Anders was a victim of a poorly written and railroaded plot.

__________

I would be interested to hear how it was bad implementation.
Perhaps I have lower standards when it comes to games (vs real book series).
However, if I can accept that I can heal my health in Assassin's Creed with smelling salts (like when i take a misstep from a crazy high building) - then surely I can use my imagination to fill in any weak links in the Anders story.  Though, I was happy with the Anders  implementation.  I saw him as a missionary type that got more extreme and he was torn and needed support at times.  I didn't need anything more than that.

[Plaintiff]

To say that Merrill was inconsistent, we'd have to first know something, anything, about her character in DA:O. And we don't. She demonstrated no personality of any kind in the five minutes we spent with her, so how can we say that her portrayal in DA2 is inaccurate?

Modifié par Plaintiff, 01 décembre 2013 - 05:07 .

[Nefla]

wolfhowwl wrote...

There should have been an option to hand her over to the Dalish.

Or the templars.

[zMataxa]

DinoSteve wrote...

Merrill should have died.

___________

I said the same about Fenris - the "anti-mage existence" templar-in training.
Oh wait, I did make that happen!  Dual daggers saw him to the Fade in a hurry.

It's kinda neat how these pixel characters make you react.

Modifié par zMataxa, 01 décembre 2013 - 05:11 .

[wolfhowwl]

Statare wrote...
If you pay attention, Anders makes it pretty clear since the beginning of DAII that something extreme might happen. Flemeth even foreshadows what will happen. It was not "railroaded". It developed over the course of the game and felt organic. Anders gets moodier and moodier with every progressing Act, implying he's becomming desperate. Contrary to being random or disastorous, Anders role could even be argued to be pretty well written and developed.

The person you are quoting is saying that people who dislike the character of Anders for blowing up the Chantry should consider viewng him as an element of the plot that allows the story to progress. Like when Snape kills Dumbledore or something. You may not like it, but it happened, and now you have to deal with it. Unfortunately, people feel like companions should do exactly what they want them to do, which would make for a static story. On the one hand, they want well written characters, but on the other hand they don't want characters who do things they don't want them to. 

But said element of the plot is poorly done.

If the player isn't given the ability to stop it, Anders' scheme should succeed because it is clever.

It should not succeed because everyone else goes completely stupid and Hawke is blatantly railroaded so Anders can win and Dragon Age 2 can finally stagger to its endgame.

Nefla wrote...

wolfhowwl wrote...

There should have been an option to hand her over to the Dalish.

Or the templars.

Agreed. Unlike Anders she was not involved in the core plotline and while the player would lose out on her personal quests and plenty of gigglesqueeing it is a choice that would fit a Pro-Templar run.

Modifié par wolfhowwl, 01 décembre 2013 - 06:03 .

[Silfren]

wolfhowwl wrote...

Statare wrote...
If you pay attention, Anders makes it pretty clear since the beginning of DAII that something extreme might happen. Flemeth even foreshadows what will happen. It was not "railroaded". It developed over the course of the game and felt organic. Anders gets moodier and moodier with every progressing Act, implying he's becomming desperate. Contrary to being random or disastorous, Anders role could even be argued to be pretty well written and developed.

The person you are quoting is saying that people who dislike the character of Anders for blowing up the Chantry should consider viewng him as an element of the plot that allows the story to progress. Like when Snape kills Dumbledore or something. You may not like it, but it happened, and now you have to deal with it. Unfortunately, people feel like companions should do exactly what they want them to do, which would make for a static story. On the one hand, they want well written characters, but on the other hand they don't want characters who do things they don't want them to. 

But said element of the plot is poorly done.

If the player isn't given the ability to stop it, Anders' scheme should succeed because it is clever.

It should not succeed because everyone else goes completely stupid and Hawke is blatantly railroaded so Anders can win and Dragon Age 2 can finally stagger to its endgame.

Nefla wrote...

wolfhowwl wrote...

There should have been an option to hand her over to the Dalish.

Or the templars.

Agreed. Unlike Anders she was not involved in the core plotline and while the player would lose out on her personal quests and plenty of gigglesqueeing it is a choice that would fit a Pro-Templar run.

It's entirely possible that there's a reason why that option was not available though.  It's possible--likely, I would think--that the eluvians will play a significant role in a future plot that requires Merrill to be alive and free.

[wolfhowwl]

But you can kill her in the Gallows!

I was surprised you couldn't turn her over as that seemed like an obvious betrayal point like with Isabela and the Arishock.

Modifié par wolfhowwl, 01 décembre 2013 - 06:10 .