401 réponses à ce sujet

[Jaison1986]

I'm well aware she is an pirate, however, the game make it looks like she mostly dedicated herself to smuggling, thievery and the ocasional raiding. But now it's actually shown that she coldly killed helpless people to get away from trouble. I do wonder if people would have the same view about her if they found out in the game how she actually murdered all her entire cargo in the first trip.

[BouncyFrag]

Pirates are bad people who do horrible things. She is a pirate who has done horrible things. She is a bad person. Seems pretty straight forward to me.

[leaguer of one]

Jaison1986 wrote...

I'm well aware she is an pirate, however, the game make it looks like she mostly dedicated herself to smuggling, thievery and the ocasional raiding. But now it's actually shown that she coldly killed helpless people to get away from trouble. I do wonder if people would have the same view about her if they found out in the game how she actually murdered all her entire cargo in the first trip.

She did not do it willingly. And she did not willingly transport the slaves. Added, she made it clear she never wanted to do it again and had to be tricked into it a second time. When she found out she freed them all.

[leaguer of one]

wright1978 wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

Amd Isabela is not inconsistant.

Agreed.

Isabela is a pirate. Piracy, by its very definition, involves violence and murder. That she murdered slaves should not come as a shock. Also that she later frees slaves is not inconsistency, it is character development. Isabela was haunted by her decision and she seeks to make amends by later freeing slaves.

I'm not shocked but i think rewriting history to add such a motivation behind the subject that's a major part of her 10 year character arc in DA2 is rather poor in my opinion.

No it's not. It rewrite nothing being that the event of her killing slave happen beofr the event she freed them.

[Sifr]

leaguer of one wrote...

But she did not lie. The slave killing happen way before she freed the slaves. Those are two different events.

I know they were two seperate events, I was simply pointing out that Isabela has a tendency to lie or omit details.

[Daerog]

I'm surprised this has gone on for four pages.

Isabela was/is self centered. She willingly killed slaves to save her own skin. She discovered that another shipment involved slaves, she had a spark of doubt and conscience, and freed them, so her character developed the opinion that "all should be allowed to do what they will" to some degree, as long as it doesn't affect her, she agrees with being free but she is not a crusader for it in any way.

Not all people are static in their opinions or personality. Not all people share every aspect of their past with others, even close friends or lovers, especially Isabela who is used to keeping up a tough front due to her lifestyle.

This isn't the first thread about Isabela having a dark past revealed and people believing it was a change in her character (more like a change in the way some people perceived her, which is different). I don't remember many threads about Loghain being inconsistent (which he wasn't, he was a bit different, but that wasn't an inconsistency) from Stolen Throne to DA:O, but maybe my memory is just faulty there.

Modifié par DaerogTheDhampir, 15 septembre 2013 - 05:43 .

[Deebo305]

Much like many have said here, People change nuff said

[leaguer of one]

Sifr1449 wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

But she did not lie. The slave killing happen way before she freed the slaves. Those are two different events.

I know they were two seperate events, I was simply pointing out that Isabela has a tendency to lie or omit details.

Truth but what was omit is why she freed the slaves. That still means she did change as a person and regreated it reguardless. It show how much she hates her self for it. It's not an inconsistancy.

[RogueWriter3201]

DaerogTheDhampir wrote...

I'm surprised this has gone on for four pages.

Isabela was/is self centered. She willingly killed slaves to save her own skin. She discovered that another shipment involved slaves, she had a spark of doubt and conscience, and freed them, so her character developed the opinion that "all should be allowed to do what they will" to some degree, as long as it doesn't affect her, she agrees with being free but she is not a crusader for it in any way.

Not all people are static in their opinions or personality. Not all people share every aspect of their past with others, even close friends or lovers, especially Isabela who is used to keeping up a tough front due to her lifestyle.

This isn't the first thread about Isabela having a dark past revealed and people believing it was a change in her character (more like a change in the way some people perceived her, which is different). I don't remember many threads about Loghain being inconsistent (which he wasn't, he was a bit different, but that wasn't an inconsistency) from Stolen Throne to DA:O, but maybe my memory is just faulty there.

This. Sadly the only person who can put an end to the discussion/perceptions about Isabela is Gaider, and something tells me he won't even bother given how feral this forum has been of late concerning various things.

[wright1978]

leaguer of one wrote...

wright1978 wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

Amd Isabela is not inconsistant.

Agreed.

Isabela is a pirate. Piracy, by its very definition, involves violence and murder. That she murdered slaves should not come as a shock. Also that she later frees slaves is not inconsistency, it is character development. Isabela was haunted by her decision and she seeks to make amends by later freeing slaves.

I'm not shocked but i think rewriting history to add such a motivation behind the subject that's a major part of her 10 year character arc in DA2 is rather poor in my opinion.

No it's not. It rewrite nothing being that the event of her killing slave happen beofr the event she freed them.

Sorry but adding a new twist which supposedly now forms the entire basis for why she saved the later slaves is something that in my opinion deserves to be part of the DA2 arc if that's the direction they wanted to take with her backstory.

[BouncyFrag]

Handing her over to Aveline at the end of Act 2 should have been an option. Aveline even brings this up when you confront the Arishok when he asks Hawke turn her over.

[leaguer of one]

wright1978 wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

wright1978 wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

Amd Isabela is not inconsistant.

Agreed.

Isabela is a pirate. Piracy, by its very definition, involves violence and murder. That she murdered slaves should not come as a shock. Also that she later frees slaves is not inconsistency, it is character development. Isabela was haunted by her decision and she seeks to make amends by later freeing slaves.

I'm not shocked but i think rewriting history to add such a motivation behind the subject that's a major part of her 10 year character arc in DA2 is rather poor in my opinion.

No it's not. It rewrite nothing being that the event of her killing slave happen beofr the event she freed them.

Sorry but adding a new twist which supposedly now forms the entire basis for why she saved the later slaves is something that in my opinion deserves to be part of the DA2 arc if that's the direction they wanted to take with her backstory.

No It does not.  It akes nothing away from her back story. Isabela was always show as aperson you had to be careful around. She is fun but dangerous like fire works. She is also is a character shwon to have regrets tells others they don't want her life.  She was never shown as being heroic but a person of conflicting morals. This takes or added nothing to that.
She herself tells you after she freed the slave she regreted it because of the toulbe it casued her. It just add to the fact she daces around the issue of moral.

[Dutchess]

wright1978 wrote...

I'm not shocked but i think rewriting history to add such a motivation behind the subject that's a major part of her 10 year character arc in DA2 is rather poor in my opinion. 

I agree. I haven't read the comics (or the novels) but what is being described here seems like a very big thing. It changes quite a lot about Isabela, so I can't say I appreciate how it was saved for a comic.

[Daerog]

renjility wrote...

wright1978 wrote...

I'm not shocked but i think rewriting history to add such a motivation behind the subject that's a major part of her 10 year character arc in DA2 is rather poor in my opinion. 

I agree. I haven't read the comics (or the novels) but what is being described here seems like a very big thing. It changes quite a lot about Isabela, so I can't say I appreciate how it was saved for a comic.

Many character's pasts are saved for comics or books, only because they don't tell the PC. Loghain's past is mentioned here and there, but one will get a large dose of character personality and development if one reads The Stolen Throne (compared to Isabela anyway, the slave drowning was not a surprise, she was a very self centered person, could be different if Hawke went rival with her, but change won't be immediate).

It doesn't change the character, just the audience's perspective (maybe, didn't shock me).

[Angrywolves]

To me it's largely irrelevant.
If Isabela is an npc in DAI, then I'll treat her like the other npcs.
I certainly wouldn't try to kill her because of her alleged past bad acts.
If she's a dlc character or is in some future DA game and can be recruited as a party member I will recruit her.
If I can romance her I will.
My opinion of her hasn't changed based upon this thread.

[Han Shot First]

Xilizhra wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

I'd like to know what, if anything, is too brutal for a pirate?

Pirates aren't cuddly characters who say "Arrrrgh" all day while feeding their pet parrots. They're hijackers, armed robbers and murderers.

Or sometimes mostly smugglers, the thing that Isabela refers to most. And Hawke does all of those throughout the game except hijacking, in a legal sense (unless it all counts as self-defense, somehow).

Isabela and the crew of the Siren's Call are referred to as pirates however, which suggests that smuggling wasn't their only past time. Drug smugglers aren't considered pirates for example. A pirate is specifically someone who committed acts of armed robbery at sea. The word pirate itself is derived from a Latin term that meant "brigand." Isabela was also described as "the pirate scourge of two coastlines and four nations," an unlikely label for someone whose only crime is smuggling.

While a botched smuggling job plays a large part of Isabela's backstory in DA2, smuggling doesn't appear to have been the only crime her crew committed on the high seas.

[Dutchess]

leaguer of one wrote...

No It does not.  It akes nothing away from her back story. Isabela was always show as aperson you had to be careful around. She is fun but dangerous like fire works. She is also is a character shwon to have regrets tells others they don't want her life.  She was never shown as being heroic but a person of conflicting morals. This takes or added nothing to that.
She herself tells you after she freed the slave she regreted it because of the toulbe it casued her. It just add to the fact she daces around the issue of moral.

Yes, it does. Freeing slaves the first time you find them as your cargo is very different from freeing the second batch of slaves because you feel guilty about drowning the first group. In the first situation, which is described in DA2, Isabela shows that some things go too far for her and supports her idea that everybody deserves to be free. In the second situation she acts out of guilt. It changes her motivations and her sense of morale (or what little that she has of it). 
It also changes her potential relationship with Fenris. He clearly approved of her freeing the slaves, and I bet he would not be willing to hook up with her if he knew she had let another group drown. Bah, that fling between them already didn't make that much sense to me from Fenris' perspective (the guy has serious issues), but this stains it even more.

[Mr.House]

I see no rewriting of Isabelas history. Whatever it was executed properly is a different conversation, but it is not a rewrite because alot of her past was still a mystery and let's not forget Isabela lies, and has admitted it many times.

The comic simply explored a part of her life that no one knew about along with her real name, I don't see the issue. Now if the issue is it's execution then I agree.

[wright1978]

Mr.House wrote...

I see no rewriting of Isabelas history. Whatever it was executed properly is a different conversation, but it is not a rewrite because alot of her past was still a mystery and let's not forget Isabela lies, and has admitted it many times.

The comic simply explored a part of her life that no one knew about along with her real name, I don't see the issue. Now if the issue is it's execution then I agree.

I see it as material that is directly tied to her character arc in DA2. If it was some other aspect of her past being revealed i'd view it as being less problematic. Really if this is the basis for her DA2 arc then imo it should come up there. It doesn't mean i still don't love Isabela as a character, i just think it is a rather disappointing way of trying to trade off her existing arc.

[Mr.House]

wright1978 wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

I see no rewriting of Isabelas history. Whatever it was executed properly is a different conversation, but it is not a rewrite because alot of her past was still a mystery and let's not forget Isabela lies, and has admitted it many times.

The comic simply explored a part of her life that no one knew about along with her real name, I don't see the issue. Now if the issue is it's execution then I agree.

I see it as material that is directly tied to her character arc in DA2. If it was some other aspect of her past being revealed i'd view it as being less problematic. Really if this is the basis for her DA2 arc then imo it should come up there. It doesn't mean i still don't love Isabela as a character, i just think it is a rather disappointing way of trying to trade off her existing arc.

It's possible this might have came up in the canned expansion, but with that gone, Gaider might have put it in the dlc since Isabela will not have a big part in DAi hence we would not know about her past? That's the only thing I can think about. Mary has teased that the Bianca plotline will be important for Varric in DAI hence that was revealed in the comic, along with forshadoing in DA2+Legacy.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

I mentioned it in the other thread I started and I absolutely agreed, although most other people didn't. Isabella's actions in that were so brutal they were OOC and are totally inconsistent with her arc in DA2. The fact that she would cross such a line paints her as a monster instead of just a scoundrel, like the rest of the game does. And the fact that she never bring it up in the game, undermines her character development during DA2. Hawke is the reason she becomes inspired to be a better person (romanced or not) but she never mentions it to them. She feels guilty about her actions, but Hawke insists she can be better, yet she never brings up what her real past or what she'd be feeling guilty about, despite that being the perfect opportunity to do so.

Hawke believes in her, so she starts to believe in herself too. But how can she when she knows Hawke doesn't know the real her?

If her arc is about finding some redemption, but omits she the single worst thing she ever did and continually lies about it when it gets brought up to hide it from her friends, it makes the whole experience feel less genuine and more dishonest. I think an event like this would be central to her character arc.

It also raises the question of why no-one would tell her that she was carrying slaves if she demonstrated she had no concern for their welfare in the past.

If you were to compare this to Sten, it would be like if he was introduced as being in the cage for some other reason and never reveals that he murdered those families. Most of the time in Origins I absolutely left him behind in the cage with no regrets, but I was able to make an informed decision. And Sten's character in DAO is largely defined by him carrying the guilt from that event throughout the rest of the game. If it had been removed from the story, but still somehow included in the EU you could not possibly have understood the character properly in the game. This is Isabella's greatest crime, how can you remove it from the game and still have her character be completely realized?

And this reveal came years after the game was out, so it's not like "no recruiting Isabella" is an option.

I'm unhappy with this reveal because I was a fan of the Isabella character and I think this is very detrimental to her after the fact.

Bringing up Leliana is actually another example of something I had problem with. That reveal in her DLC is quite different with what she told the Warden, but there's nothing in it that she'd want to hide and the basic gist of the story is the same. There's no reason I can see for her to lie to her friend/lover about her past by that point. I'm absolutely convinced that the only reason that Leliana's Song reveals she "lied" to the Warden is because whoever wrote it didn't really care about making it match up to what DAO said. By altering the events and setting, they were able to reuse old content to make the DLC easier, and give the story a more "traditional" conclusion by having a final boss fight with Raleigh and have a final confrontation with Marjolane before she leaves.

Both facts directly contradict what she told the Warden but if they had been omitted then the DLC would have just ended with her escaping the dungeon and fleeing. I don't think that would have been considered a satisfying ending to the gameplay. All it really seems to accomplish in the end is making Leliana a liar for no reason.

Modifié par Jedi Master of Orion, 15 septembre 2013 - 07:22 .

[Reznore57]

Meh , if she doesn't trust Hawke , she left Kirkwall to burn.
She also ask Hawke to spare a slaver for her boat , because she doesn't want to cross some Pirate code of cool .
She can be incredibly shallow and short sighted...

[RogueWriter3201]

Just saw this interesting exchange by Gaider about this topic. Guess I was somewhat wrong about him not wanting to comment on it:

twitter.com/davidgaider/status/379326448365871104 

[Ryzaki]

glenboy24 wrote...

Just saw this interesting exchange by Gaider about this topic. Guess I was somewhat wrong about him not wanting to comment on it:

twitter.com/davidgaider/status/379326448365871104 

That's that I suppose.

Doesn't matter much to me because I always figured her for the type. I do wish it had been in game though. I hate the whole throwing extra information about side characters in side material thing. Mostly because I don't bother with side material so won't know it unless I figure it out on a forum.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 15 septembre 2013 - 07:47 .

[In Exile]

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

Hawke believes in her, so she starts to believe in herself too. But how can she when she knows Hawke doesn't know the real her?

Because she's a selfish liar? Her rivalry path in DA2 is about being less selfish and helping others, but her bing "eureka" moment is not letting a slaver go free. She'd have been happy to do it if it meant getting her ship despite all the harm she'd have caused (on the friendship path). She doesn't care about the consequences. She comes back to pull Hawke out of the fire because she cares about Hawke, not because she cares about Kirkwall burning. 

If her arc is about finding some redemption, but omits she the single worst thing she ever did and continually lies about it when it gets brought up to hide it from her friends, it makes the whole experience feel less genuine and more dishonest. I think an event like this would be central to her character arc.

Her ark is about selfinsness and selflesness. 

If you were to compare this to Sten, it would be like if he was introduced as being in the cage for some other reason and never reveals that he murdered those families. Most of the time in Origins I absolutely left him behind in the cage with no regrets, but I was able to make an informed decision. And Sten's character in DAO is largely defined by him carrying the guilt from that event throughout the rest of the game. If it had been removed from the story, but still somehow included in the EU you could not possibly have understood the character properly in the game. This is Isabella's greatest crime, how can you remove it from the game and still have her character be completely realized?

Sten's guilt is losing control of himself contra the teaching of the Qun, not necesarily murdering those people.