660 réponses à ce sujet

[Ziggeh]

Hazegurl wrote...

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.

Fair enough - I don't think the fact that the choice actually concerns the ashes is a decent point anyway, because she makes it clear she won't stand by - and there are circumstances were you can directly choose to fight her.

I think the more important point is that in all cases you do not choose whether she survived your fight or not. You choose to fight her and you fought her - her being alive doesn't change that, and so doesn't invalidate the choice.

[Rawgrim]

azarhal 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.

 
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.

They turn into a pile of bones afterwards. As did Leliana.

[TheRealJayDee]

Rawgrim wrote...

They turn into a pile of bones afterwards. As did Leliana.

That's about the most definite way the game can tell us that someone is, in fact, dead. I'm tempted now to start the game and try doing this with Leliana's corpse... just because:


That's Wynne, btw, after an early disagreement with my mage...

Modifié par TheRealJayDee, 08 juillet 2013 - 08:26 .

[Ziggeh]

Rawgrim wrote...

azarhal wrote...
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.

They turn into a pile of bones afterwards. As did Leliana.

azarhal wrote...
DAO and DA2 are totally segrated between the story and the gameplay mechanics

Modifié par Ziggeh, 08 juillet 2013 - 08:27 .

[aries1001]

Isn't the Codex entry for Leliana's death written by Brother Genitivi? As far as I remember didn't he stay behind while the party (including Leliana) went into the Ashes part of the mountain?

I also think I rememeber that David Gaider once said or wrote that the Codex entries should be taken as the viewpoint of their authors e.g. Brother Genitivi. In other words, people shouldn't treat the Codes entries as this is what in the(ir) game, but rather as this: According to Brother Genitivi this is what happened to Leliana i.e. she is death. But who is to say that Brother Genitivi is correct? According to Oghren, the whole mountain and especially the cave is a lyrium conductor. (probably even red lyrium or raw lyrium and who knows what this will do a person who is supposed to be dead).

Also, pleaee note this: Yogis and holy men in India, and Tibet as well as in ancient Egypt have learned to control their breathing lowering it into such a state that they appear death, who is to say that Leliana didn't pick up a similar technique in Orlais.

[xkg]

I think the most definite answer to "whether Leliana can be killed or not" you can find inside the game files. There are 2 flags that should make it clear:

{6203269} The player killed Leliana
{6203270} The player did not kill Leliana

[dsl08002]

Considering that she is my main LI for my warden (Picture) so i got no problem with it.

[KiwiQuiche]

Ryzaki wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

XM-417 wrote...

berelinde wrote...

It really is better for everyone if they give characters they want to use later on plot armor. Don't want that character to stay dead? Make them unkillable.

I would hope to see the PC being allowed some choice in how they deal with these characters who get pampered and coddled with plot armour. As it was annoying that at the end of MoTA you just let that elf go and you couldn't do a damm thing about it.

Nah, apparently that was only annoying because we are all jealous of Tallis, not like she was a back-stabbing qunari spy or anything.


But yeah I agree. They need to be very careful about this sort of thing as it goes bad quickly if handled poorly, as it currently is.

A good way to me anyay is having the PC express dislike for them and maybe even attack/injure them and just have them retreat.

Even if Hawke had gotten a face filled of dirt and Tallis had ran away it'd been better than the whole "welp I'm just gonna stand here and let you walk away" thing. Least then Hawke would've *tried* to stop her. Even if unsuccessful.

Yeah that was bad. What a way to make Hawke seem even more useless.


Hawke: Give me that.
Tallis: Nah.
Hawke: Oh well, I tried. *goes home*

[Sifr]

Since I never made this choice, it's not really a problem for me since Leliana always lives.

The choice itself to defile the Ashes never made much sense either, since I'd much rather have sacrificed Arl Eamon and Leliana, if I knew I was getting Father Kolgrim, his army of Reavers and maybe even "Andraste" on my side against the Darkspawn. Even if I was an Evil Warden, this simply isn't pragmatic enough for either of those two to die, simply to please an insane cult.

My real problem with Leliana in DA2 was how she showed up three times with all the DLC, but never really gave even a simple explanation of how she came to work for the Divine after leaving the Warden, or simply what she was doing during the events of Awakening?

And for why Hawke and Carver can mention Leliana in dialogue, yet upon meeting her later in the game, Hawke doesn't recognise her until her real name is mentioned. Even then, Hawke remembers her as the women who travelled with the Warden, not as the attractive, redheaded nun with an Orlesian accent from Lothering? A minor nitpick, but still somewhat jarring in my opinion.

Rather than divine will, it would make more sense if one assumes that the Warden simply non-fatally wounded her and her supposed "death" was a fiction created to allow her to work undercover for the Divine. That,  or simply to hide from the Warden if s/he tried to finish the job?

Modifié par Sifr1449, 08 juillet 2013 - 09:50 .

[Sir George Parr]

KiwiQuiche wrote...



Yeah that was bad. What a way to make Hawke seem even more useless.


Hawke: Give me that.
Tallis: Nah.
Hawke: Oh well, I tried. *goes home*

I would have preferred... 
Hawke: Give me that.
Tallis : *LOL* no. 
Hawke: *Murder knife in the back of the elfs head and recovers the list from her lifeless corpse goes home, job done*

 End credit music for this version of Mota would be 'Oh, Happy day' performed by The Edwin Hawkins singers.emphasis on the Happy day part.

Modifié par XM-417, 08 juillet 2013 - 10:14 .

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

XM-417 wrote...

berelinde wrote...

It really is better for everyone if they give characters they want to use later on plot armor. Don't want that character to stay dead? Make them unkillable.

I would hope to see the PC being allowed some choice in how they deal with these characters who get pampered and coddled with plot armour. As it was annoying that at the end of MoTA you just let that elf go and you couldn't do a damm thing about it.

Nah, apparently that was only annoying because we are all jealous of Tallis, not like she was a back-stabbing qunari spy or anything.


But yeah I agree. They need to be very careful about this sort of thing as it goes bad quickly if handled poorly, as it currently is.

A good way to me anyay is having the PC express dislike for them and maybe even attack/injure them and just have them retreat.

Even if Hawke had gotten a face filled of dirt and Tallis had ran away it'd been better than the whole "welp I'm just gonna stand here and let you walk away" thing. Least then Hawke would've *tried* to stop her. Even if unsuccessful.

Yeah that was bad. What a way to make Hawke seem even more useless.


Hawke: Give me that.
Tallis: Nah.
Hawke: Oh well, I tried. *goes home*

Petrice: Nah nah you can't stop me!
Hawke: I should kill you.
Petrice: That's cute, bye bye now!

Larius: I'm totally not possessed you know...
Hawke: Sounds legit, see ya!

Orsino: You've got to pick a side!
Hawke: Nah I don't really care.
Meredith: Nu uh you gotta!
Hawke: Okay!


....

[Bfler]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

If you're going to kill off a character for whatever reason, keep them dead and create a new character.  

That would e.g. mean all of the Witcher games are redundant, because Geralt dies at the end of the books and is revived before Witcher 1. 

[ArenCordial]

Bfler wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...

If you're going to kill off a character for whatever reason, keep them dead and create a new character.  

That would e.g. mean all of the Witcher games are redundant, because Geralt dies at the end of the books and is revived before Witcher 1. 

That wasn't player choice.  Its fine in a medium like a novel where the author is the sole architect, The reader doesn't get to decided what the author should have his characters do.  In a game that presents you with choice, the very least is that choice should be honored and player should be made to accept the consequences of their decision no matter what they pick.  Unpopular or not.

Effectively invalidating that decision even with a retcon doesn't showcase the choice and consequences BioWare claims pervade their games.

Modifié par ArenCordial, 09 juillet 2013 - 05:15 .

[Bfler]

ArenCordial wrote...
... the very least is that choice should be honored and player should be made to accept the consequences of their decision no matter what the pick.

Ah ok, then all the players, who complain, should have to start a new game after the selection of a dialog option, which results in a battle with death of the group and game over as result, even if it is 5 minutes before the end of the game. No save and reload.

Modifié par Bfler, 09 juillet 2013 - 05:22 .

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Bfler wrote...

ArenCordial wrote...
... the very least is that choice should be honored and player should be made to accept the consequences of their decision no matter what the pick.

Ah ok, then all the players, who complain, should have to start a new game after the selection of a dialog option, which results in a battle with death of the group and game over as result, even if it is 5 minutes before the end of the game. No save and reload.

So this is where you take a semi-reasonable idea and go full congress on it?

Excellent tale broski.

[ArenCordial]

Bfler wrote...

ArenCordial wrote...
... the very least is that choice should be honored and player should be made to accept the consequences of their decision no matter what the pick.

Ah ok, then all the players, who complain, should have to start a new game after the selection of a dialog option, which results in a battle with death of the group and game over as result, even if it is 5 minutes before the end of the game. No save and reload.

Reductio Ad Absurdum (I think that's what I'm looking for)

When you feel like making valid points let us know.

[Bfler]

ArenCordial wrote...

Bfler wrote...

ArenCordial wrote...
... the very least is that choice should be honored and player should be made to accept the consequences of their decision no matter what the pick.

Ah ok, then all the players, who complain, should have to start a new game after the selection of a dialog option, which results in a battle with death of the group and game over as result, even if it is 5 minutes before the end of the game. No save and reload.

Reductio Ad Absurdum (I think that's what I'm looking for)

When you feel like making valid points let us know.

You said, choice should matter and that's an example. The player chooses the option which leads to death and the player has to accept the outcome.

And btw. don't try to look intellectual here if you don't have any counter arguments.

Modifié par Bfler, 09 juillet 2013 - 05:42 .

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

"I'm taking this idea to an absurd extreme" really isn't something that you need to use counter arguments against, you just sort of dismiss it and move on.

Modifié par Grand Admiral Cheesecake, 09 juillet 2013 - 05:46 .

[Bfler]

Grand Admiral Cheesecake wrote...

"I'm taking this idea to an absurd extreme" really isn't something that you need to use counter arguments against, you just sort of dismiss it and move on.

That's not absurd. You can't only have the things which please you. You want choice, then accept negative outcomes from your choice.

[ArenCordial]

Bfler wrote...

ArenCordial wrote...

Bfler wrote...

ArenCordial wrote...
... the very least is that choice should be honored and player should be made to accept the consequences of their decision no matter what the pick.

Ah ok, then all the players, who complain, should have to start a new game after the selection of a dialog option, which results in a battle with death of the group and game over as result, even if it is 5 minutes before the end of the game. No save and reload.

Reductio Ad Absurdum (I think that's what I'm looking for)

When you feel like making valid points let us know.

You said , the player should accept the choice and that's an example. The player chooses the option which leads to death and the player has to accept the outcome.

And btw. don't try to look intellectual here if you don't have any counter arguments.

Maybe if your response didn't seem so absurd, but all right I'll play your game.

If the player chose to play an Ironman mode I agree.   Standard difficulty obviously not. 

If the player chooses to sacrifice their character or another.  Game over for that character or npc.  I don't see a problem with a player reloading especially because a miss click or something else could have meant the picked something that was not their intent (something very real in a game with the dialogue wheel or text speech without tone).  I don't see a problem with reloading to see other options, but if the player commits to a decision then the story should continue to play out respecting that decision.  Otherwise what's the point of choice? 

[ArenCordial]

Grand Admiral Cheesecake wrote...

"I'm taking this idea to an absurd extreme" really isn't something that you need to use counter arguments against, you just sort of dismiss it and move on.

Well said sir/mame.

[Bfler]

ArenCordial wrote...


If the player chooses to sacrifice their character or another.  Game over for that character or npc.  I don't see a problem with a player reloading especially because a miss click or something else could have meant the picked something that was not their intent (something very real in a game with the dialogue wheel or text speech without tone).  I don't see a problem with reloading to see other options, but if the player commits to a decision then the story should continue to play out respecting that decision.  Otherwise what's the point of choice? 

Means, if the char of the player is dead after the prefered decision, then he has to stay dead and the player has to start a new game (by himself).

Modifié par Bfler, 09 juillet 2013 - 06:05 .

[ArenCordial]

Bfler wrote...

ArenCordial wrote...


If the player chooses to sacrifice their character or another.  Game over for that character or npc.  I don't see a problem with a player reloading especially because a miss click or something else could have meant the picked something that was not their intent (something very real in a game with the dialogue wheel or text speech without tone).  I don't see a problem with reloading to see other options, but if the player commits to a decision then the story should continue to play out respecting that decision.  Otherwise what's the point of choice? 

Means, if your char is dead after your prefered decision, then he has to stay dead and the player has to start a new game (by himself).

If your going to highlight some of what I say don't ignore other parts.

" I don't see a problem with reloading to see other options."  Save for Ironman modes.

Ultimately good writing would have the sacrifice/death decision of the PC at end of a game for the conclusion/big emotional pay off.  So for this example I agree with the devs decision that ME2 failure/dead Shepard shouldn't be imported to 3.

Modifié par ArenCordial, 09 juillet 2013 - 06:11 .

[Dutchess]

aries1001 wrote...

Isn't the Codex entry for Leliana's death written by Brother Genitivi? As far as I remember didn't he stay behind while the party (including Leliana) went into the Ashes part of the mountain?

I also think I rememeber that David Gaider once said or wrote that the Codex entries should be taken as the viewpoint of their authors e.g. Brother Genitivi. In other words, people shouldn't treat the Codes entries as this is what in the(ir) game, but rather as this: According to Brother Genitivi this is what happened to Leliana i.e. she is death. But who is to say that Brother Genitivi is correct? According to Oghren, the whole mountain and especially the cave is a lyrium conductor. (probably even red lyrium or raw lyrium and who knows what this will do a person who is supposed to be dead).

Also, pleaee note this: Yogis and holy men in India, and Tibet as well as in ancient Egypt have learned to control their breathing lowering it into such a state that they appear death, who is to say that Leliana didn't pick up a similar technique in Orlais.

The codex entries for the companions do not have a known author. They do not have a name at the end of the text like some other entries. Which to me always meant that those entries were written by "the Maker". Nothing indicates that it's the warden's diary or written by Genitivi. Since you can kill Genitivi, he would hardly have the time to write about Leliana's death anyway. Some codex entries are clearly subjective and merely expressing a viewpoint or retelling an experience, but it is always clear when this is the case, by the way it is written and often by the name of the author at the bottom of the text. The entries for characters are not written in such a way. They state some rather general information on the character and seem to be purely objective, written by some all-knowing being (the Maker, or rather: mr Gaider or another writer of the team). Turning around and suddenly claiming subjectivity and even mistakes in those entries is a cheap move, imo, and hardly convincing.