660 réponses à ce sujet

[IanPolaris]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

The Codex is hardly irrefutable. My Codex told me that Oghren, Nathaniel and Velanna died at Vigil's Keep, even though the first two survived in the epilogue and the third wasn't there.

Epilogue are rumors (unfortunately , what is point doing endings which are a lie) at least they ignore most of them and Nathaniel if alive should be in third act but if you leave him in keep doesn't appear...

Again if I remember Bioware correctly, this discrepency was caused by a known bug.  If you had done all the castle quests (upgraded the walls, sealed off the deep roads, killed the wraith), then the people you left behind (if you choose to save Amaranthine) should have survived.  This is a case where the epilog slides were correct in this respect but the game itself was bugged.  Additionally the bug would also flag any character not with you (if you saved the city) as dead defending Vigil's keep even if the were already dead (which is how Zombie Velanna died (again) defending the humans of Vigil's keep....a good trick since my Warden executed her for murder).

-Polaris

[LobselVith8]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

The Codex is hardly irrefutable. My Codex told me that Oghren, Nathaniel and Velanna died at Vigil's Keep, even though the first two survived in the epilogue and the third wasn't there.

Epilogue are rumors (unfortunately , what is point doing endings which are a lie) at least they ignore most of them and Nathaniel if alive should be in third act but if you leave him in keep doesn't appear...  

The Epilogues are now heresay because the developers rectonned most of the outcomes.

[CitizenThom]

scyphozoa wrote...

jtav wrote...

Because it negates a player choice, albeit one I've never made.

Exactly this. I am never going to kill Leliana, she is one of my favorite characters. But any character who dies, either directly by the choice of the player, or as a result of a player's choice, that aspect of the player's choice has to be accurately upheld. Now, David Gaider has said they will directly address this in the future, so it is not being retconned or ignored, but it will be explained within the lore.

<snip>

To be fair, the Leliana situation seems sort of like the Rachni Queen scenario in ME3. They didn't want to give up that plot point if people killed a necessary character, so they just shoe-horn in a clone, or a resurrected version to keep it within the lore. 

I've never killed Leliana (other than that one save where I poured the raver's blood into the sacred ashes)... still I think it's an easy enough thing to write around without clones or resurrections. If Leliana's dead, then someone else enters the picture who knew Leliana in Lothering or some such. Or maybe they learned about the Warden from one of his other fellow adventurers. That's just off the top of my head. Doesn't seem like it would be that hard a thing to write around.

[TheKomandorShepard]

CitizenThom wrote...

scyphozoa wrote...

jtav wrote...

Because it negates a player choice, albeit one I've never made.

Exactly this. I am never going to kill Leliana, she is one of my favorite characters. But any character who dies, either directly by the choice of the player, or as a result of a player's choice, that aspect of the player's choice has to be accurately upheld. Now, David Gaider has said they will directly address this in the future, so it is not being retconned or ignored, but it will be explained within the lore.

<snip>

To be fair, the Leliana situation seems sort of like the Rachni Queen scenario in ME3. They didn't want to give up that plot point if people killed a necessary character, so they just shoe-horn in a clone, or a resurrected version to keep it within the lore. 

I've never killed Leliana (other than that one save where I poured the raver's blood into the sacred ashes)... still I think it's an easy enough thing to write around without clones or resurrections. If Leliana's dead, then someone else enters the picture who knew Leliana in Lothering or some such. Or maybe they learned about the Warden from one of his other fellow adventurers. That's just off the top of my head. Doesn't seem like it would be that hard a thing to write around.

What who will find her in forgotten mountains in forgotten temple (except Flemeth who may follow warden in the form of animal) months after her death even if she was injured she have to be deadly injured because warden hit rather strongly especially mage so a long time without help won't survive. 

[Todd23]

I would love a link to wherever it was established that epilogues are rumors. I do recall someone, possibly Gaider having to point out that sources of information should be considered with things such as codex entries. But the epilogues and codex entries that are stated as facts should be considered as facts as your character can be considered the source. But any codex entries that have an author or any epilogues that are actually stated to be rumors could very well be untrue.

[Lotion Soronarr]

TheRealJayDee wrote...
Of course it's extremely difficult -if not outright impossible- to keep the gameplay and it's mechanics 100% consistent with the lore/story, but the better they harmonize the better the experience imo. If they are too much out of sync the believability of the setting suffers, but of course this affects the enjoyment of different players differently.

Oh, I agree wiht you 100%.
I too prefer harmony between gameaply and lore, but that is so very, very rare.

[Lotion Soronarr]

LobselVith8 wrote...
The Epilogues are now heresay because the developers rectonned most of the outcomes.

They were always hear-say. 
I recall the devs stating that after DA:O released.

[Roujinx94]

Because I killed her and she refused to stay dead.

I'm sure if Morrigan suddenly popped up in DA:I with a kid and said he had the soul of an old god inside him, regardless of your refusal to do the ritual in Origins and the fact that you stabbed her in WH, people at Bioware would start getting death threats...again.

While those two choices are completely different, one simply being "Do you want to kill this girl or not?" and the other being "Do you REALLY want to give the soul of a god to a potentially evil witch who won't tell you what she intends to do it with it?" the fact still remains that you gave the player a choice and now you're saying "Well, no, sorry. You picked the wrong one, should've picked the canon instead". Railroading, as in, finding a replacement for Leliana and giving Morrigan an average child is ok, retconning and telling the player his choice isn't worth jack isn't, otherwise what's the point of even giving choices? Just tell us a linear story.

[azarhal]

Roujinx94 wrote...

Because I killed her and she refused to stay dead.

I'm sure if Morrigan suddenly popped up in DA:I with a kid and said he had the soul of an old god inside him, regardless of your refusal to do the ritual in Origins and the fact that you stabbed her in WH, people at Bioware would start getting death threats...again.

While those two choices are completely different, one simply being "Do you want to kill this girl or not?" and the other being "Do you REALLY want to give the soul of a god to a potentially evil witch who won't tell you what she intends to do it with it?" the fact still remains that you gave the player a choice and now you're saying "Well, no, sorry. You picked the wrong one, should've picked the canon instead". Railroading, as in, finding a replacement for Leliana and giving Morrigan an average child is ok, retconning and telling the player his choice isn't worth jack isn't, otherwise what's the point of even giving choices? Just tell us a linear story.

It has been repeated a thousand already, there never was a choice to kill Leliana. Nowhere in the game is there a options that says: kill Leliana.  The choices was to defile the ashes, this has for consequences that Leliana will leave the party and attack you.

Performing the dark ritual is a choice, but Morrigan could have asked Alistair or Loghain behind your back. Or even Riordan for that matter. The player isn't a god, you don't control what the NPCs do.

[Rawgrim]

azarhal wrote...

Roujinx94 wrote...

Because I killed her and she refused to stay dead.

I'm sure if Morrigan suddenly popped up in DA:I with a kid and said he had the soul of an old god inside him, regardless of your refusal to do the ritual in Origins and the fact that you stabbed her in WH, people at Bioware would start getting death threats...again.

While those two choices are completely different, one simply being "Do you want to kill this girl or not?" and the other being "Do you REALLY want to give the soul of a god to a potentially evil witch who won't tell you what she intends to do it with it?" the fact still remains that you gave the player a choice and now you're saying "Well, no, sorry. You picked the wrong one, should've picked the canon instead". Railroading, as in, finding a replacement for Leliana and giving Morrigan an average child is ok, retconning and telling the player his choice isn't worth jack isn't, otherwise what's the point of even giving choices? Just tell us a linear story.

It has been repeated a thousand already, there never was a choice to kill Leliana. Nowhere in the game is there a options that says: kill Leliana.  The choices was to defile the ashes, this has for consequences that Leliana will leave the party and attack you.

Performing the dark ritual is a choice, but Morrigan could have asked Alistair or Loghain behind your back. Or even Riordan for that matter. The player isn't a god, you don't control what the NPCs do.

She dies as a consequence of that choice. By your logic everyone the player kills, down to the smalles deep stalker, could be alive since it wasn`t a choice made by the player.

[Ziggeh]

Rawgrim wrote...

She dies as a consequence of that choice. By your logic everyone the player kills, down to the smalles deep stalker, could be alive since it wasn`t a choice made by the player.

Essentially yes, though the circumstances - rogue trained in deception goes down in magical room with magical healing artifact that won't get any sort of foot traffic - are pretty exceptional.

[Spicen]

I dont care if im given another chance to eliminate her.

[azarhal]

Rawgrim wrote...

She dies as a consequence of that choice. By your logic everyone the player kills, down to the smalles deep stalker, could be alive since it wasn`t a choice made by the player.

 
Yes, this mean that the warden leave most opponents "as good as dead" after a fight and if these opponents get to find "healing" they could still be alive later. There are NPCs though that are dead, because their status was verified after the fight (by the player or NPCs in a cutscenes) or the player get to knife them in a cutscene.

DAO and DA2 are totally segrated between the story and the gameplay mechanics (it's one of the weakness of the series). The only time you make a choice is through dialog anyway.

[Roujinx94]

Ziggeh wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

She dies as a consequence of that choice. By your logic everyone the player kills, down to the smalles deep stalker, could be alive since it wasn`t a choice made by the player.

Essentially yes, though the circumstances - rogue trained in deception goes down in magical room with magical healing artifact that won't get any sort of foot traffic - are pretty exceptional.

Said magical healing artifact is now tainted and presumably no longer working. I would be willing to believe the room itself is magical or something but it all comes down to the fact that her appearence in DA2 was handled very poorly, she does not acknoewldge the fact that the warden tried to murder her, even worse, she thinks she went on adventures with him/her and they were buddies.

Modifié par Roujinx94, 08 juillet 2013 - 05:10 .

[Ziggeh]

Roujinx94 wrote...

she does not acknoewldge the fact that the warden tried to murder her, even worse, she thinks she went on adventures with him/her and they were buddies.

I would say "says" rather than "thinks", which is a different story.

And I understood she said something about the Maker saving her? Would that not be an acknowledgement?

[LobselVith8]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

The Epilogues are now heresay because the developers rectonned most of the outcomes. 

They were always hear-say. 
I recall the devs stating that after DA:O released. 

The Epilogue slides that make it explicitly that they were simply heresay were only heresay. There's a significant difference between those specific slides and the rest of the Epilogue slides that were clearly written as outcomes.

[Ziggeh]

LobselVith8 wrote...
the rest of the Epilogue slides that were clearly written as outcomes.

I'm not sure "clearly" is the word I would use. We have no reason to believe they're not, unless they evidentally contradict something else, which I assume is the case here?

[Roujinx94]

Ziggeh wrote...

Roujinx94 wrote...

she does not acknoewldge the fact that the warden tried to murder her, even worse, she thinks she went on adventures with him/her and they were buddies.

I would say "says" rather than "thinks", which is a different story.

And I understood she said something about the Maker saving her? Would that not be an acknowledgement?

I think you can mention that you heard she died, to which she replies with something along the lines of "Yeah, well, The Maker and all that good stuff". Pretty sure someone posted a link earlier in this thread too. If she's lying about her travels with the Warden then that's just a cheap excuse on top of another cheap excuse by Bioware, they really shouldn't keep this chain going. Why would she have to lie about that to Hawke? Doesn't really seem like she has anything to gain by doing that.

[Baelyn]

azarhal wrote...

Roujinx94 wrote...

Because I killed her and she refused to stay dead.

I'm sure if Morrigan suddenly popped up in DA:I with a kid and said he had the soul of an old god inside him, regardless of your refusal to do the ritual in Origins and the fact that you stabbed her in WH, people at Bioware would start getting death threats...again.

While those two choices are completely different, one simply being "Do you want to kill this girl or not?" and the other being "Do you REALLY want to give the soul of a god to a potentially evil witch who won't tell you what she intends to do it with it?" the fact still remains that you gave the player a choice and now you're saying "Well, no, sorry. You picked the wrong one, should've picked the canon instead". Railroading, as in, finding a replacement for Leliana and giving Morrigan an average child is ok, retconning and telling the player his choice isn't worth jack isn't, otherwise what's the point of even giving choices? Just tell us a linear story.

It has been repeated a thousand already, there never was a choice to kill Leliana. Nowhere in the game is there a options that says: kill Leliana.  The choices was to defile the ashes, this has for consequences that Leliana will leave the party and attack you.

Performing the dark ritual is a choice, but Morrigan could have asked Alistair or Loghain behind your back. Or even Riordan for that matter. The player isn't a god, you don't control what the NPCs do.

Very well said. :happy:

[Ziggeh]

Roujinx94 wrote...

If she's lying about her travels with the Warden then that's just a cheap excuse on top of another cheap excuse by Bioware, they really shouldn't keep this chain going. Why would she have to lie about that to Hawke? Doesn't really seem like she has anything to gain by doing that.

She wouldn't be lying to Hawke specifically - Hawke asks her directly. She is apparently part of The Warden's story, whether she was part of his life or not. And we don't know what she gains from that, though I would imagine her position in the Chantry would have something to do with it.

As for cheap, eh, your mileage varies. Is it as dramatic an impact as we would like? Perhaps not, but did we really expect every choice we make to have expensive ramifications on the design of future games? I think that's an unrealistic expectation.

Modifié par Ziggeh, 08 juillet 2013 - 05:48 .

[Hazegurl]

azarhal wrote...

Roujinx94 wrote...

Because I killed her and she refused to stay dead.

I'm sure if Morrigan suddenly popped up in DA:I with a kid and said he had the soul of an old god inside him, regardless of your refusal to do the ritual in Origins and the fact that you stabbed her in WH, people at Bioware would start getting death threats...again.

While those two choices are completely different, one simply being "Do you want to kill this girl or not?" and the other being "Do you REALLY want to give the soul of a god to a potentially evil witch who won't tell you what she intends to do it with it?" the fact still remains that you gave the player a choice and now you're saying "Well, no, sorry. You picked the wrong one, should've picked the canon instead". Railroading, as in, finding a replacement for Leliana and giving Morrigan an average child is ok, retconning and telling the player his choice isn't worth jack isn't, otherwise what's the point of even giving choices? Just tell us a linear story.

It has been repeated a thousand already, there never was a choice to kill Leliana. Nowhere in the game is there a options that says: kill Leliana.  The choices was to defile the ashes, this has for consequences that Leliana will leave the party and attack you.

Performing the dark ritual is a choice, but Morrigan could have asked Alistair or Loghain behind your back. Or even Riordan for that matter. The player isn't a god, you don't control what the NPCs do.

There was a choice given to the player it's just that those choices lead up to a certain outcome based on those actions. If you drink and drive and kill someone you're not going to say "I didn't CHOOSE to kill that person." but you chose to drink and chose to get behind the wheel that led up to X outcome happening. The same thing with the outcome of Leliana's death.  The player chose to bring Leliana along for the ashes quest whether they meant to kill her or not. The player was given the choice to poison the ashes. The player poisoned the ashes and Leliana attacked and was killed just like every other character who attacked and was killed. That was the outcome of giving the player these choices and if it were never meant to kill off Leliana then they should have never implemented it in the first place. She should have told you off and left the group. But I'm not going to fall for that bs excuse of "The actual choice to kill her wasn't given to you" or "Just because you THOUGHT she was dead doesn't mean she was" not buying that at all and it's an insult to ppl's intelligence to even give them that nonsense.

[Roujinx94]

Ziggeh wrote...

As for cheap, eh, your mileage varies. Is it as dramatic an impact as we would like? Perhaps not, but did we really expect every choice we make to have expensive ramifications on the design of future games? I think that's an unrealistic expectation.

Expensive ramifications? Not really. I wouldn't even mind if it was just completely forgotten about and ignored like the OGB, which I did and I'm not mad at all that there wasn't anything about it in DA2. Like I said in an earlier post, I do not mind railroading but I do, however, mind retcons.

Still, I see your point. I like to think that they plan on giving Leliana a larger role in DA:I so that at least it the retcon will be somewhat justified, not making two different characters (that play a minor role, mind you, this is why I'm so disappointed that she wasn't simply replaced for those who killed her) to account for two different choices in DA2 was inexcusable, at least for me, but if she has a lot of screentime in DA:I then at least it will be a little more understandable.

[Ziggeh]

Roujinx94 wrote...

Expensive ramifications? Not really. I wouldn't even mind if it was just completely forgotten about and ignored like the OGB, which I did and I'm not mad at all that there wasn't anything about it in DA2. Like I said in an earlier post, I do not mind railroading but I do, however, mind retcons.

Still, I see your point. I like to think that they plan on giving Leliana a larger role in DA:I so that at least it the retcon will be somewhat justified, not making two different characters (that play a minor role, mind you, this is why I'm so disappointed that she wasn't simply replaced for those who killed her) to account for two different choices in DA2 was inexcusable, at least for me, but if she has a lot of screentime in DA:I then at least it will be a little more understandable.

Yeah, I assume the reason she was in DA:2 at all was to illustrate that she 'aten't dead as a setup for DA:I

Hazegurl wrote...

If you drink and drive and kill someone you're not going to say "I didn't CHOOSE to kill that person." but you chose to drink and chose to get behind the wheel that led up to X outcome happening.

This analogy doesn't really help your point, because while you are responsible for the outcome, the outcome was not your intent - this is recognised in law.

[TheRealJayDee]

azarhal wrote...

It has been repeated a thousand already, there never was a choice to kill Leliana. Nowhere in the game is there a options that says: kill Leliana.  The choices was to defile the ashes, this has for consequences that Leliana will leave the party and attack you.

...and be killed doing so, yeah.

[Hazegurl]

Ziggeh wrote...

This analogy doesn't really help your point, because while you are responsible for the outcome, the outcome was not your intent - this is recognised in law.

The point is that a choice or set of choices were made by a person that resulted in x outcome to occur. That is still a choice and bioware chose to implement the choices made that resulted in Leliana's death. Heck they even implemented Leliana's death into the game. It's not the same as "Do you choose to step on the gas right when someone is walking down the street or not" or "deliver killing blow to Leliana or not" but the choices made led up to that result. To say the player wasn't given a choice at all is just cherry picking.