660 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

I don't care whether it invalidates the choice. What does that even mean?

I care if it contradicts on-screen content.

[ArenCordial]

Ziggeh wrote...

That wouldn't because we can be really very sure the Warden died. That said, I fully expect him to pop up with either the soul of another old god (because if I were writing this, I'd be that much of a troll) or special in some other way.

There was huge pillar of energy shooting into the sky, who's to say that couldn't have killed the Warden from its proximity.

I get that people are unhappy, and have no issue with that. It's perfectly understandable.

My issue is with people implying that their displeasure means that the decision was objectively wrong, when what they mean is not as satisfying an impact as I had hoped, with holding this to a different standard than other elements because it suits their current argument, and all the flawed arguments people use because they think "this is my preference" is a weak position.

I really have very little opinion on the topic, but I am an enormous pedant, and "I felt it invalidated my choice" and "It invalidated the choice" are entirely different positions.

Most everything can be boiled down to preference.  Some people will say its wrong to kill no matter what.  Other say its ok to kill defending others from aggressors.  People usually speak in absolutes or make definitive statements, that's just the way it is.  I felt it invalidated my choice and it invalidated my choice is a hair of difference and while I'm willing to grant that hair, to me the choice and consequence are linked and to invalidate the one can ultimately only weaken the other.  Seeing weaker gameplay aspects isn't ideal because we all want a stronger game.  I think we can all agree whatever our position we'd like our choices respected.

[Ziggeh]

ArenCordial wrote...

I felt it invalidated my choice and it invalidated my choice is a hair of difference and while I'm willing to grant that hair, to me the choice and consequence are linked and to invalidate the one can ultimately only weaken the other.  

The difference between objective and subjective is more than a hair. 
And I have no issue with the second statement. But what it amounts to is that it caused the issue for you specifically, and by implication, potentially others. It does not mean that the writers were objectively wrong.

[Ziggeh]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I don't care whether it invalidates the choice. What does that even mean?

I care if it contradicts on-screen content.

That's a knotty one.

Completely understand the desire to request combat elements be consistent in future games, but do you think the narrative of future games should attempt to validate* those elements of past games we're aware are inconsistent and/or bugs?

*where possible - Shrodinger's Zevran would be problematic.

Modifié par Ziggeh, 11 juillet 2013 - 10:12 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Mykel54 wrote...

You´re wrong. In DAO, after you kill Flemeth you can tell Morrigan what you did, and she will say that her mother is far from being dead. This is DAO (the same game where you kill Flemeth), telling you that even thought you killed her, she may not be dead. That is not retroactive continuity, the writers of DAO planned for it, and it wasn´t added later on another game or dlc, it was right there in the main game.

You want to know what Flemeth´s codex says after you kill her?
She was slain at Morrigan's behest. At least apparently...


Now compare to what the codex says when Leliana is killed
When The Warden corrupted and destroyed the Sacred Ashes of Andraste,
Leliana drew her weapon and was killed alongside the guardian.

This is a retcon for several reasons: 1) it is established in DAO that Leliana died, there is no suggestion of something else happening. 2) The suggestion that she might not be dead comes from a later (in real world time) chapter, namely DA2. That is retroactive continuity, it means modifying past events in order to better fit the new narrative that you want to tell.

The Flemeth appearance in DA2 has nothing in common, it is merely provides a in-world explanation to something that was already established in DAO through Morrigan and through Flemeth´s own codex entry: that she was only apparently dead.

I see a flaw. The codex updates with what the Warden knows. Morrigan knew about Flemeth possibly not being dead and told the Warden. But who told him abotu Leli? No one.

Are you telling me that every time a character comes back, the audience has to be told about it beforehand? Given a clue? I say not.
The "Flemeth maybe still alive" bit may be more to give the player impression of Flemeths power than anything else.


I just don't think it's necessary for the developers or writers to telegraph everything to the audience/player.

Can you immagine if the Codex would be filled with things like:
"you just met Loghian. He seems very untrustworthy and will probably betray you in a few hours"

[Sylvius the Mad]

Ziggeh wrote...

Completely understand the desire to request combat elements be consistent in future games, but do you think the narrative of future games should attempt to validate* those elements of past games we're aware are inconsistent and/or bugs?

Actually, yes.

Once DAO was out there, and BioWare knew that Leliana could be decapitated, they needed to do one of three things:

1. Formulate an explanation for Leliana's survival that takes her possible decapitation into account;
2. Patch the game so as to eliminate the possibility of decapitation; or
3. Not use Leliana again.

Those were their options.

The Zevran thing is a big enough problem that I'm actually surprised this fix didn't make it into any of DAO's regular patches.

[Zanallen]

Mykel54 wrote...

The Flemeth appearance in DA2 has nothing in common, it is merely provides a in-world explanation to something that was already established in DAO through Morrigan and through Flemeth´s own codex entry: that she was only apparently dead.

And presumably, we shall receive an in-world explanation in a future game as to why Leliana is still alive. The codex is either written by someone else or updated by what the warden believes to be true. It is entirely fallible.

[Angrywolves]

Does all this really matter.
Leliana is alive in the DA series. Players need to deal with it.

[ArenCordial]

Ziggeh wrote...

ArenCordial wrote...

I felt it invalidated my choice and it invalidated my choice is a hair of difference and while I'm willing to grant that hair, to me the choice and consequence are linked and to invalidate the one can ultimately only weaken the other.  

The difference between objective and subjective is more than a hair. 
And I have no issue with the second statement. But what it amounts to is that it caused the issue for you specifically, and by implication, potentially others. It does not mean that the writers were objectively wrong.

I think I may have stated what I was try to get across poorly or you focusing on that specific part of what I said and missed the point that I was trying to make with the preceding lines.  That being what one would call objective and subjective are often a matter of perspective/perception.  Course we both are probably getting way too philosophical.

I agree though BioWare didn't do anything objectively wrong.  Course they could say screw RPGs/screw companions/character driven stories/romances or 1000 of the other reasons it seems ppl on these boards buy these games and still not do anything objectively wrong.  That doesn't mean portions of it fan base won't think they are making the wrong business/design decision which ultimately what this thread is about. 

That said do think they made the wrong decision with the retcon ultimately because such a decision can weaken player enjoyment, the choice and consequence relationship, and sets a bad precedent.

[ArenCordial]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Ziggeh wrote...

Completely understand the desire to request combat elements be consistent in future games, but do you think the narrative of future games should attempt to validate* those elements of past games we're aware are inconsistent and/or bugs?

Actually, yes.

Once DAO was out there, and BioWare knew that Leliana could be decapitated, they needed to do one of three things:

1. Formulate an explanation for Leliana's survival that takes her possible decapitation into account;
2. Patch the game so as to eliminate the possibility of decapitation; or
3. Not use Leliana again.

Those were their options.

The Zevran thing is a big enough problem that I'm actually surprised this fix didn't make it into any of DAO's regular patches.

Why not just simply patch to have her not decide to fight the Warden?  It would have made it easy.  She could still tell you off and leave the party so she's alive and the player still has to deal with the consequences of loosing a party member by violating their ideals.

Personally I still don't see why these characters had to survive other than perhaps fan service to people who like those characters.   I think perhaps BioWare has gotten a little too reliant on trying to flesh out the world in comics/books/etc with player companions to create interest at the expense of the individuals gaming experience.  I think that's a bad call, because usually BW is good a creating interest in new characters that they don't need to rely on old ones.

Modifié par ArenCordial, 11 juillet 2013 - 10:24 .

[Angrywolves]

That's just your opinion.
If people want some holdovers from previous games or Bioware wants them then do be it.

[Angrywolves]

so be it.

[Sylvius the Mad]

ArenCordial wrote...

Why not just simply patch to have her not decide to fight the Warden?  It would have made it easy.  She could still tell you off and leave the party so she's alive and the player still has to deal with the consequences of loosing a party member by violating their ideals.

Granted.  That would be another available option.

Personally I still don't see why these characters had to survive other than perhaps fan service to people who like those characters.   I think perhaps BioWare has gotten a little too reliant on trying to flesh out the world in comics/books/etc with player companions to create interest at the expense of the individuals gaming experience.  I think that's a bad call, because usually BW is good a creating interest in new characters that they don't need to rely on old ones.

Thy could have it both ways by abandoning the save import system.  That way we wouldn't need a player's decisions in one game to affect the next at all - the next game would be a stand-alone product.

[Travie]

The devs have consistently ignored feedback in this area, but they at least have given responses.

Yes, Gaider's defense of it has become a meme, har har har. He decided that the player's decision to kill her didn't matter and that choice will be ignored, so why keep arguing about it? He doesn't seem like the type to yield to criticisms, valid or otherwise, especially in this case since he came under so much ridicule for it.

It might be immersion-breaking and a bit silly, but it's just one of those things you have to deal with or ignore to have fun with the game.

[ArenCordial]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Thy could have it both ways by abandoning the save import system.  That way we wouldn't need a player's decisions in one game to affect the next at all - the next game would be a stand-alone product.

Actually that would have been the best way to go for each of the sequels if they simply moved the timeline forward by a generation or two.  After all this series encompasses the Dragon AGE does it not?  That way the majority of the characters would be dead from age, gone on their calling, etc and they wouldn't need to really focus too much on the details.  60 years from now the ruler of Ferelden isn't going to Alistair, Anora, or the Warden.  Its simply just going to be the King of Ferelden, you decide for yourself the lineage.  60 years ago was the Blight, a Warden hero ending it, there was a mage rebellion in Kirkwall and leave out the specifics.

Modifié par ArenCordial, 12 juillet 2013 - 04:31 .

[xnode]

David Gaider wrote...

Since this is another topic that has come up yet again, I shall point to my blog post which addresses it.

Not that it will make much difference to those who just don't like it no matter the reasoning or explanation (or lack thereof), I'm sure-- but there you go.

It may or may not been brought up, but for me (after reading your blog) my gripe on this is your company promotes these "Chained event's" from other previous versions of their games. In your example you are basically saying "yes I am god this is my world and this is my choice", but the point most are trying to make is , "if that's the case, your stories don't fully carry over as you have boasted for years they do" Because in the end, some of our choices might make a difference some now won't, so why does it matter in that aspect anymore? 

Personally if that is truly your stance and the stance of the company you should take out chained event's all together and stop promoting your titles and carry overs and chained events stories. For choices are a whim and are as meaningful as you see fit, not the player. This is not an insult but an observation, when you do this sort of writing you might not be the writer you think you are in my eyes at least. To me , it sounds like the fans know the world better then the creators and writers whom designed the world to begin with, that's pretty sad.

Modifié par xnode, 12 juillet 2013 - 05:24 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Actually, yes.

Once DAO was out there, and BioWare knew that Leliana could be decapitated, they needed to do one of three things:

1. Formulate an explanation for Leliana's survival that takes her possible decapitation into account;
2. Patch the game so as to eliminate the possibility of decapitation; or
3. Not use Leliana again.

Those were their options.

The Zevran thing is a big enough problem that I'm actually surprised this fix didn't make it into any of DAO's regular patches.

OR:

D) Not bother with idiots who can't differentiate between gamepaly and story and obsess over a random animation.

[Ziggeh]

xnode wrote...
 For choices are a whim and are as meaningful as you see fit, not the player.

So you're saying the text is determined by the people writing it? 

I get that you'd like more impact but if you think the player should be able to determine consequences you've really misunderstood the relationship. You can apply whatever you like, but it won't change the fact that no matter what you select the text is predetermined.

Modifié par Ziggeh, 12 juillet 2013 - 08:49 .

[KiwiQuiche]

Stay classy, David. Though I'm surprised you didn't pull the jealously card with players having a problem with Leliana.

Why does Bioware even bother with giving the player choice if they are just gonna override it all with their own then?

Seems a colossal waste of time. Maybe they should just switch to shooters or straight-gunned adventure games rather than RPG if they can't keep choice and options consistent.

[Ziggeh]

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Why does Bioware even bother with giving the player choice if they are just gonna override it all with their own then? 

One instance does not equal all instances.

Modifié par Ziggeh, 12 juillet 2013 - 09:21 .

[KiwiQuiche]

Ziggeh wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Why does Bioware even bother with giving the player choice if they are just gonna override it all with their own then? 

One instance does not equal all instances.

Judging from the reaction from quite a few people, once is enough.

[JWvonGoethe]

ArenCordial wrote...

Your Warden married Alistair?  Well guess what his advisors convinced him two Warden's can't make an heir so he dumps you like a hot rock after a few years to try and get Ferelden a Therin heir.

Except that a female human noble Warden can say to Alistair regarding an heir: "You don't think the baby has to be yours do you? (or words to that effect) and he seems fine with it.

Modifié par JWvonGoethe, 12 juillet 2013 - 09:30 .

[Boycott Bioware]

Lol, that's a slippy argument to make because if you start applying that logic to everything, it ultimately will mean you really are only left with a pointless choice, which may not matter because consequences can be changed at any time. Your Warden married Alistair? Well guess what his advisors convinced him two Warden's can't make an heir so he dumps you like a hot rock after a few years to try and get Ferelden a Therin heir. Refuse to take place in the Dark Ritual? Well Morrigan found some Warden on the outskirts of Denerim shagged him and OGB is cannon.

The Warden decide to sacrifice own life to kill the Archdemon, because her life have been wasted, only have 30 years to live, no boyfriend, family is gone, barren, tainted and might become a retard...she sank the blade to Archdemon heart...and die....everybody are sad and give their last respect....on the way to Weissupt, a lightning strike on the coffin...the Warden wake up and sing "I will survive! I will survive!!! Yeah yeah!!!"

[KiwiQuiche]

I spat tea all over the floor after reading that, Qistina XD

[Chashan]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Actually, yes.

Once DAO was out there, and BioWare knew that Leliana could be decapitated, they needed to do one of three things:

1. Formulate an explanation for Leliana's survival that takes her possible decapitation into account;
2. Patch the game so as to eliminate the possibility of decapitation; or
3. Not use Leliana again.

Those were their options.

The Zevran thing is a big enough problem that I'm actually surprised this fix didn't make it into any of DAO's regular patches.

OR:

D) Not bother with idiots who can't differentiate between gamepaly and story and obsess over a random animation.

Sorry, but failing to funnel that particular scene into a cutscene - something which would make a good deal of sense given the developers' intention to make use of those characters again - while leaving said gameplay in place which does contain such a definitely lethal animation is just beyond sloppy and inexcusable.
I am saying this as someone who never opts to take either Leliana nor Wynne out, by the way.

Thus, I can very well understand and relate to people being upset over this, as BW would have been obliged to at the very least provide step 2. Although then again, maybe some mod does take care of business there (another good point for toolkits to be released: if obvious bugs of this nature are not spotted, the community can be given a chance to fix it).