Ziggeh wrote...
It alters the outcome of one of your choices, not the choice itself, and in this case, acknowledges that choice.crimzontearz wrote...
like I was saying above, a direct retcon invalidates your choice
Exactly that. You can both accept a retcon and want choices to have impact.Senior Cinco wrote...
What are you referring to exactly?Ziggeh wrote...
Those aren't mutually exclusive.Senior Cinco wrote...If you are willing to accept retconning then hugs and kisses to you, my dear. Why is it so hard to want a series, that is prominent on being a staple RPG and allow your actions to be transferred to another installment actually carry weight to that claim?
Two events are 'mutually exclusive' if they cannot occur at the same time.
Filament wrote...
Well... if she survived being killed, that's not a retcon at all, just a twist.
If she was originally intended as killed and you changed it so now she's alive, that's kind of an 'under the hood' retcon, because it's never explicit that she died, per se. I don't think that really would count as a retcon either because authorial intent isn't part of the universe itself, only what results from it. And what results here isn't in conflict except when people take the deathblow animations as inviolable.
Personally I do think there is a meaningful caution to take out of it, when throwing in the sort of violence porn with brutal dismemberments and deathblows and such, to make sure not to allow that on important characters you might want to bring back later... gameplay mechanics may be an abstraction but the visuals should still reflect what's actually happening, not be so abstracted that cutting someone's head off just didn't happen, if need be.
The choice isn't life or death. That is the outcome. The choice is to fight her or not.Rawgrim wrote...
Dead or alive are polar opposites. If you make a choice about life or death, and the game just changes your choice to the opposite of the one you made, your choice gets invalidated.
as in "I aknowledge you made a choice....but what you chose does not suit what I want to do so, I change its outcome do in reality it does not matter what you chose"Ziggeh wrote...
It alters the outcome of one of your choices, not the choice itself, and in this case, acknowledges that choice.crimzontearz wrote...
like I was saying above, a direct retcon invalidates your choice
Modifié par crimzontearz, 05 juillet 2013 - 03:04 .
crimzontearz wrote...
So....why would I give you the choice anyway?
I... don't know how to respond to that.Ziggeh wrote...
Exactly that. You can both accept a retcon and want choices to have impact.
you misunderstand me David (wait can I call you David? Did I address you as Mr Gaider last time we spoke?...I don't remember....anyway) I am fairly neutral on THIS specific instance because I do not know the specifics of it, I am debating on a general line of thought about direct retcons VS butterfly effects set by an author....David Gaider wrote...
crimzontearz wrote...
So....why would I give you the choice anyway?
Clearly the purpose of a choice in a game is so that it will carry forward into a future sequel? There is no other reason for such a choice to exist in that game? An odd hill to die on, sir, but good luck.
Modifié par crimzontearz, 05 juillet 2013 - 03:15 .
It's a flawed analogy, you've made the outcomes the subject of the choice. It's not pizza or chinese. It's whether to fight her or notcrimzontearz wrote...An analogy, I can ask you if you want pizza or Chinese for dinner, you say you want Chinese, I come back with Pizza and say "I know I gave you a choice but I really did not want you to have Chinese so I got you pizza but yeah I totally heard you when you said Chinese"
So....why would I give you the choice anyway?
It's a contradiction if you want that same choice to have an impact. You're conflating one choice with all choices.Senior Cinco wrote...
I... don't know how to respond to that.Ziggeh wrote...Exactly that. You can both accept a retcon and want choices to have impact.
It's a complete contradiction.
I think it's a little more than that. You can try to spin it all you want and throw around phrases like "I don't like it". Of course we don't like it. That's the point of being disgruntled to start with. But there's no reason to get defensive and start insulting people's intelligence.David Gaider wrote...
You're correct, of course. People like to use many terms around these parts incorrectly-- cliche and cliffhanger, to name a couple of common ones. I don't know if they are simply ignorant of the actual usage of the terms or just like to invoke them because it makes their opinion feel objectively stronger than "I don't like it". Either way, I suspect the working definition some people have of "retcon" is "what I understood to have happened previously didn't actually happen that way... and I don't like it."
Could you be any more arrogant? Good job, boss man. Of course all the player's choices are, and should be, considered precious.David Gaider wrote...
Sure. I'll point out that we've never said her head wasn't cut off, either. Some people just really seem to obsess over that as if the mere possibility that Leliana could have been decapitated makes any potential explanations invalid. Resurrection is not something that happens in the DA universe, not real resurrection, so whatever happened was clearly something extraordinary... yet I doubt what most complainers are grousing about is the lack of an explanation (which they wouldn't accept anyhow) but rather that one of their precious choices has been invalidated (or "retconned", if that even makes sense).
Modifié par Senior Cinco, 05 juillet 2013 - 03:31 .
Are you implying that the choice is only there to serve the current game itself rather than the series and universe as a whole. Why should anyone expect it to work that way or be welcoming to it being like that?David Gaider wrote...
crimzontearz wrote...
So....why would I give you the choice anyway?
Clearly the purpose of a choice in a game is so that it will carry forward into a future sequel? There is no other reason for such a choice to exist in that game? An odd hill to die on, sir, but good luck.
Senior Cinco wrote...
I think it's a little more than that. You can try to spin it all you want and throw around phrases like "I don't like it". Of course we don't like it. That's the point of being disgruntled to start with. But there's no reason to get defensive and start insulting people's intelligence.
Could you be any more arrogant? Good job, boss man. Of course all the player's choices are, and should be, considered precious.
That's too bad.David Gaider wrote...and, yes, I am one of the people whose job it is to determine which is which. *shrug*
kazuya246 wrote...
Are you implying that the choice is only there to serve the current game itself rather than the series and universe as a whole. Why should anyone expect it to work that way or be welcoming to it being like that?
Senior Cinco wrote...
That's too bad.David Gaider wrote...and, yes, I am one of the people whose job it is to determine which is which. *shrug*
Modifié par Ash Wind, 05 juillet 2013 - 04:11 .
Guest_Aotearas_*
Ziggeh wrote...
I appreciate this goes round in circles and it's distressing to cover the same ground over and over, but the definite state of her corpse and the fixed state of magic aren't things that have been explored within this thread. Happy for you to point out other threads, just don't think antagonistic dismissal gets you anywhere when it's inaccurate.Neofelis Nebulosa wrote...
Your reading comprehension leaves much to be desired then.
Fine, a small recap if you aren't willing to work for a proper discussion yourself:I think it's fairly unlikely that the person who wrote the codex went to the cave, guarded by magic and lost to history, where the Warden commited a major crime against the religion of the continent, to check if her body was still there. And didn't say, hear the story second hand (or further) and happen to write it down.Neofelis Nebulosa wrote...
So Leliana is defeated, presumably dead (Codex itself states she's dead in her personal entry, so it's fair to assume whoever writes the Codex did in fact check if she's dead or just knocked out).
Modifié par Neofelis Nebulosa, 05 juillet 2013 - 04:18 .
Twisted Path wrote...
A good example I would look to is Steven Erikson's Malazan books. They're a very epic and elaborate high fantasy series where characters (very fun and memorable characters,) constantly die, much like the way the plot of Dragon Age: Origins can go down. Erikson compensates for this by introducing lots and lots of characters that he keeps juggling, and it works very well.
I don't have an issue with Leliana appearing in DA2 if she was killed in
DAO, its a fantasy game and these things can happen. She dies in the
vicinity of some Ashes that are rumored to have healing properties.
Additionally…
for all we know, the urn could be filled with the ashes of Andraste’s
horse, and its actually the abundance of lyrium near the crypt that
Oghren senses that causes the healing. These things happen (in fantasy
games).
However, where I think BW drops the ball is in keeping
the ‘Why’ this great secret that cannot be revealed, because it’s just
so awesome. When things like this happen, its nice to know why. It adds
to the lore, and would even add to Leliana’s character. Leliana defied
death because… well, who knows.
As it stands now, all we know is it’s possible to kill Leliana, and she still appears in DA2, and we don’t know why.
Given
that its in-game content, its easy to conclude that if an answer is
ever to be provided, it won’t be until the Fall, 2014. Which is fine,
but how relevant will it be at that point? If Leliana appears in DAI,
then it might be relevant, if she doesn’t, it will be little more than
‘oh, there’s an answer to that odd situation to that game that was
released 2 and a half years ago.'
Modifié par HiroVoid, 05 juillet 2013 - 04:14 .
Guest_Aotearas_*
Bfler wrote...
Neofelis Nebulosa wrote...
Bringing back from the precipice of death, possible. Bringing back someone that's most definately rotting away for hours, days, whatever, not possible.
Leandra? Her body was cut in pieces and then reanimated.
The rest of the post wasn't related to any of the points I made. They were general responses to points made throughout the thread.Neofelis Nebulosa wrote...I believe I asked you once already, you didn't, then I believe I recapped the facts, which you then go on to happily ignore for the most part (really, the only point you argue is the Codex and seemingly only because you think you can contest that point!) AND accuse me of asspulls. Or was that another thread aswell? I can't quite remember ...
I think it's fairly clear that in either case it's knowledge available to the Warden. The Warden thinking she is dead does not equal she is dead.Neofelis Nebulosa wrote...
As for the Codex, it is written without given author. So either it is written as journal from party members (presumably the Warden himself, because only s/he is present at all times and could thus know all events that may or may not have transpired) or it is written by the narrative not bound by ingame perception, so unreliable narrator is not the case.
Retour en haut
