1256 réponses à ce sujet

[Hiemoth]

Silfren wrote...

Angrywolves wrote...

DA2 was a crock.
Nothing hawke did really mattered.
Don't intend to read Gaider's books or comic .
The DA wiki has a brief synopsis.
The break had been coming for some time.
You can see it coming with Uldred and the events in the tower.

Nothing Hawke did was supposed to matter.  That her efforts were futile was the entire point.  I get that not a lot of people like that kind of narrative, but that's the kind of story that DA2 was, and the kind of story that Bioware wanted to tell.

If I may ask, why do you not intend to read Gaider's books?  I understand just not wanting to read in general, but if you do like to read, I don't at all understand the refusal.  

I'm not completely certain that nothing Hawke did didn't matter, as s/he affected great many things, such as was a certain Templar spared, what happened with Feynriel, did the sibling survive or that a High Dragon isn't terrorizing Kirkwall. It was just that the Qunari invasion and the Annulment would always happen, they needed to happen in the games for the larger Dragon Age mythos. And even in those events Hawke influenced a lot of things, such as the city guard protecting the citizens of Kirkwall or containing the worst effects of the Fade tears.

What makes DA2 such a fascinating game was that it was a game about why something happened instead of what happened, which I consider DAO to be a classical example of. Did the Qunari invasion happen because a xenophobic Hawke was constantly aiding in the provocation or did it happen despite the peace-seeking Hawke's constant efforts to quell the unrest. Ultimately DA2 is a tragedy with possible hopeful overtones depending on how it is played. And I will stop on that tangent now, as I just re-finished it and am still completely amazed by how ambitious it is and would at the moment argue that in a way to me Hawke can be even more admirable than the Warden at their best.

I would however pose a question, as people seem to like to complain how useless Hawke was in preventing the disaster. I would argue that the rigt between the Circle towers and the Templars was bound to happen, the narrative tones were very clear in DAO, especially Awakenings. So how exactly should it have happened then? Should an event of such importance just have happened in a book and been referenced later? Should it have happened at the beginning of the game and then the glorious player then solved it by the end of the game? Should it have been something where no player agency was involved? And note, in DA2 the player was in a central role in the growing tension between Meredith and Orsino, although that story did slightly suffer from the third chapter seemingly being rushed compared to the first two chaper,

[dragonflight288]

Ieolus wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

DKJaigen wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Nothing "set off" anything. Massive international conflicts do not occur in a vacuum. The mage-templar was is the result of a thousand years of increasing tensions. It was inevitable.

I got the idea that its the last 400 years. in the last 400 years no major blights or wars occured that allowed mages to gain privileges

I have been studying the lore quite a lot recently, and I have noticed a certain discrepency when it came to the Circles.

Did you know that it was only after the third blight, the time that the Grey Wardens became politically neutral I might add, that most of the anti-mage propaganda started being spewed?

I believe that the mages started getting the short end of the staff as the Chantry and the templars gained more power and authority over them, and less accountability. It took over a hundred years before Tranquillity was introduced, and two hundred before the Right of Annulment became something to be authorized...by a Grand Cleric who may or may not ever set foot inside a Circle.

Giving the templars and Chantry more power over mages, over time, removing their accountability, and it was only inevitable that what happened in Kirkwall and Asunder happened, just as it was only inevitable that the templars began to believe that they had authority over mages by dvine right, and not because they simply took it by inches, when the original Circle agreement had the Circles run by a council of Enchanters and the templars were there to guard and advise only.

So the Grey Wardens were a check on the Chantry's influence, atleast over the Circle?  Interesting observation.

I don't know about that. There's nothing I've found in the lore that suggests this. I just found it to be an amazing coincidence that the Chantry started its anti-magic propaganda...well, excessive use of it, around the same time the Wardens became neutral.

Modifié par dragonflight288, 22 septembre 2013 - 06:35 .

[ramnozack]

They meant for Hawke to be more then he was, of that I have no doubt, but their time and budget was limited and the poor reaction DA2 got compared to DAO played a part in it not getting as much DLC. 

I honestly hope we see more of Hawke, I dont think his story is done and I believe we will play as him again some day, hopefully not to long from now, and have him really finish his story. I mean Hawke is my Wardens second cousin; being badass is in the blood!

Modifié par ramnozack, 22 septembre 2013 - 06:55 .

[azarhal]

dragonflight288 wrote...

I don't know about that. There's nothing I've found in the lore that suggests this. I just found it to be an amazing coincidence that the Chantry started its anti-magic propaganda...well, excessive use of it, around the same time the Wardens became neutral.

It's also around the same time of the Chantry schism that caused the Black and White Chantry to be created. World of Thedas especially says that the anti-magic propaganda was aimed at Tevinter at the time.

Although, I just think it's a cycle: blight happens, civil wars and unrest follow along with lots of dragons*, anti-magic sentiment grows among normal people, mage lose power. The exception is Tevinter, that goes in the opposite direction, where normals people lose power each times.

For the lots of dragons, I'm using Caged in Stone codex. This codex entry is dated 5:90, the 4th blight ended in 5:24. The dragon extinction is dated 6:15 in World of Thedas, but the hunt lasted decades and mention that dragons where an issue for a long time. The codex talks about Ferelden fearing their skies causing dwarven trade with the surface to be impacted and they were only able to resume in 5:90. Might I add that the codex trapped one of the think that the Ferelden feared and it's a dragon.

[wolfhowwl]

Well what would you have Bioware do?

For a company that prides themselves on their writing, DA2 was a disgrace. Since they decided to stick with the mage-templar plot they had to expand upon what started the conflict.

Having clashing characters and ideologies sparking war is so much better than red lyrium and thin veil induced insanity.

I hope things are adequetely explained for non-readers.

Modifié par wolfhowwl, 22 septembre 2013 - 08:22 .

[Lebanese Dude]

wolfhowwl wrote...

Well what would you have Bioware do?

For a company that prides themselves on their writing, DA2 was a disgrace. Since they decided to stick with the mage-templar plot they had to expand upon what started the conflict.

Having clashing characters and ideologies sparking war is so much better than red lyrium and thin veil induced insanity.

I hope things are adequetely explained for non-readers.

 I love how you ( and others ) speak in absolutes.

i, for one, thought DA2 had great writing where it mattered ( to me) in character development.
there could have been more consistency in the events but it still felt like a well deigned narrative

furthermore, we don't know much about red lyrium and veil tears. Why do you dismiss them so readily?

[Drasanil]

Silfren wrote...

Nothing Hawke did was supposed to matter.  That her efforts were futile was the entire point.  I get that not a lot of people like that kind of narrative, but that's the kind of story that DA2 was, and the kind of story that Bioware wanted to tell.

Given all the pre-DA2 hype Bioware was peddling with regards to rising to power and influence and Hawke's importance, the above just seems like a denial-laced justification for a rush job held together by railraoding. 

[Morroian]

Drasanil wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Nothing Hawke did was supposed to matter.  That her efforts were futile was the entire point.  I get that not a lot of people like that kind of narrative, but that's the kind of story that DA2 was, and the kind of story that Bioware wanted to tell.

Given all the pre-DA2 hype Bioware was peddling with regards to rising to power and influence and Hawke's importance, the above just seems like a denial-laced justification for a rush job held together by railraoding. 

Bioware marketing was ****e, especially for DA2, there is definite support for the above in the narrative of DA2 IMHO.

[Oasis_JS]

Hiemoth wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Angrywolves wrote...

DA2 was a crock.
Nothing hawke did really mattered.
Don't intend to read Gaider's books or comic .
The DA wiki has a brief synopsis.
The break had been coming for some time.
You can see it coming with Uldred and the events in the tower.

Nothing Hawke did was supposed to matter.  That her efforts were futile was the entire point.  I get that not a lot of people like that kind of narrative, but that's the kind of story that DA2 was, and the kind of story that Bioware wanted to tell.

If I may ask, why do you not intend to read Gaider's books?  I understand just not wanting to read in general, but if you do like to read, I don't at all understand the refusal.  

I'm not completely certain that nothing Hawke did didn't matter, as s/he affected great many things, such as was a certain Templar spared, what happened with Feynriel, did the sibling survive or that a High Dragon isn't terrorizing Kirkwall. It was just that the Qunari invasion and the Annulment would always happen, they needed to happen in the games for the larger Dragon Age mythos. And even in those events Hawke influenced a lot of things, such as the city guard protecting the citizens of Kirkwall or containing the worst effects of the Fade tears.

What makes DA2 such a fascinating game was that it was a game about why something happened instead of what happened, which I consider DAO to be a classical example of. Did the Qunari invasion happen because a xenophobic Hawke was constantly aiding in the provocation or did it happen despite the peace-seeking Hawke's constant efforts to quell the unrest. Ultimately DA2 is a tragedy with possible hopeful overtones depending on how it is played. And I will stop on that tangent now, as I just re-finished it and am still completely amazed by how ambitious it is and would at the moment argue that in a way to me Hawke can be even more admirable than the Warden at their best.

I would however pose a question, as people seem to like to complain how useless Hawke was in preventing the disaster. I would argue that the rigt between the Circle towers and the Templars was bound to happen, the narrative tones were very clear in DAO, especially Awakenings. So how exactly should it have happened then? Should an event of such importance just have happened in a book and been referenced later? Should it have happened at the beginning of the game and then the glorious player then solved it by the end of the game? Should it have been something where no player agency was involved? And note, in DA2 the player was in a central role in the growing tension between Meredith and Orsino, although that story did slightly suffer from the third chapter seemingly being rushed compared to the first two chaper,

THANK YOU =D  I feel the same for Dragon age:2  with hawke. I don't want to start anything..so please other people who are reading this..respect my comment..dont attack me with da:2 conflict or hate. =P

I just want to say THANK YOU TO THIS PERSON=D YOU express way better in words,then i can about my fun times with dragon age 2 =D.

[Heidenreich]

Haven't you finished bashing DA2 yet? It's been two years. Give it a rest. Great you didn't like it. You didn't get the point of the narrative. You didn't get to be the awesome hero that you thought was promised to you.

Great, wonderful. We get it. Now lets all move on and discuss the topic at hand rather then pick on a 2 year old game long past production.

[Medhia Nox]

- It was the mages thinking they deserve to be treated as equals without giving up what makes them unequal. Their hypocrisy is the most dangerous aspect about them.

- It is the Chantry's calcified bigotry that created a fascist Templar regime hell bent on stopping the mage threat even where it is not present.

- It is Anders because he's a psychotic terrorist and Meredith because she's a psychotic tyrant.

- It's whatever happened in Dragon Age books I won't bother reading.

Ultimately - it comes down to people on both sides being so selfish as to be willing to kill and die for their cause that caused this conflict.  It's not new - it's called the human race.  Humans will wage war over anything and everything.

@Heidenreich: I get you're tired of hearing about Hawke's failures... but Hawke's actions and the events in Kirkwall directly relate to the events taking place in DA:I.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 22 septembre 2013 - 11:08 .

[Xilizhra]

- It was the mages thinking they deserve to be treated as equals without giving up what makes them unequal. Their hypocrisy is the most dangerous aspect about them.

It's literally impossible without destroying their emotions.

- It is Anders because he's a psychotic terrorist and Meredith because she's a psychotic tyrant.

Anders recovers.

Ultimately - it comes down to people on both sides being so selfish as to be willing to kill and die for their cause that caused this conflict.

I doubt that freedom from tyranny could possibly be considered a selfish cause.

[Medhia Nox]

@Xilizhra: As you're so fond of pointing out for everything involving a mage - the "tyranny" you see is subjective.

And you still wouldn't give up magic if it meant equality even if you could.  Otherwise, how else would you be 'special'. Funny, how mage players seem to assert how 'special' they are - but still want to be treated equal. And no, I'm not putting words into your mouth.  I've seen it said several times by pro-mages: "Why should I have to give up what makes me special." blah blah blah

You cannot be both.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 22 septembre 2013 - 11:13 .

[Xilizhra]

@Xilizhra: As you're so fond of pointing out for everything involving a mage - the "tyranny" you see is subjective.

Indeed. However, if a regime is oppressing its people, we cannot refrain from overthrowing it for the sake of those people who've cozied up to the regime and its ideology.

And you still wouldn't give up magic if it meant equality even if you could. Otherwise, how else would you be 'special'. Funny, how mage players seem to assert how 'special' they are - but still want to be treated equal.

You cannot be both.

I want magic, but I don't give a crap about being "special." If I could give everyone magic and make everyone equal that way, I would. I want it for what it can do, not for some kind of status.

[Medhia Nox]

@Xilizhra: Oh, I'll be busting up some Templars... but the mages in my Thedas won't be getting a free ride. Both will fall in line and a new order will arise from the ashes of both fanatical factions... or they won't rise again at all (of course, depending on what the writer's provide)

I'm most psyched about being called a traitor by other mages.

[iOnlySignIn]

Medhia Nox wrote...

- It was the mages thinking they deserve to be treated as equals without giving up what makes them unequal. Their hypocrisy is the most dangerous aspect about them.

Equality is a lie. The strong rule and the weak perish - that is the natural order of things.

That is what the Mage Templar War is about. Power.

Modifié par iOnlySignIn, 22 septembre 2013 - 11:22 .

[Xilizhra]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Xilizhra: Oh, I'll be busting up some Templars... but the mages in my Thedas won't be getting a free ride. Both will fall in line and a new order will arise from the ashes of both fanatical factions... or they won't rise again at all (of course, depending on what the writer's provide)

I'm most psyched about being called a traitor by other mages.

We shall see. You won't see mages returning to the Circle, of that I'm certain.

[Medhia Nox]

!OnlySignIn: Not really. It has nothing to do with "ruling" in the natural order. Lions don't actually "rule" the savannah, that's purely anthropomorphism.

But, I do agree that equality is a lie.

This does not change the mage hypocrisy. They want to be treated as if they did not possess outrageous capabilities others do not possess.

My mage will recognize this and rebuke the mages for their ignorant rebellion.  I am curious, and hopeful, that the story provided in excellent for this type of playthru.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 22 septembre 2013 - 11:24 .

[iOnlySignIn]

Medhia Nox wrote...

!OnlySignIn: Not really. It has nothing to do with "ruling" in the natural order. Lions don't actually "rule" the savannah, that's purely anthropomorphism.

But, I do agree that equality is a lie.

This does not change the mage hypocrisy. They want to be treated as if they did not possess outrageous capabilities others do not possess.

What I mean is that Mages are not hypocrites per se - they never claim to be equals, only that they should be treated better than the various abuses they suffer in the Circles. Their cause of rebellion is not "we're not dangerous and should not be treated as such" so much as "we really had enough of the Chantry and the Circles and would rather not live with it any longer".

I don't think any of the rebel Mages in DA2 claim to be equal to non-Mages, except Merrill who is not really a rebel. Anders clearly thinks Mages are superior and made no secret about it ("our Maker-given gifts", etc.). At least to me. And to Fenris.

Modifié par iOnlySignIn, 22 septembre 2013 - 11:43 .

[Medhia Nox]

!OnlySignIn: Okay, I can see that.

So, perhaps not hypocrisy, but rather - willful ignorance.

I don't think I've seen any mage "rebel" express: "Yes, but we "do" need to be policed - just not by the Chantry."

Anders wants total autonomy - the man is a megalomaniac (by evidence of his final comments)

[Jedi Master of Orion]

Xilizhra wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Xilizhra: Oh, I'll be busting up some Templars... but the mages in my Thedas won't be getting a free ride. Both will fall in line and a new order will arise from the ashes of both fanatical factions... or they won't rise again at all (of course, depending on what the writer's provide)

I'm most psyched about being called a traitor by other mages.

We shall see. You won't see mages returning to the Circle, of that I'm certain.

Perhaps not. Or maybe you will. We don't know. There are a lot of stories about heroes preserving the status quo. In Dragon Age Origins in Ferelden the status quo was "not destroyed by darkspawn."

[Xilizhra]

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Xilizhra: Oh, I'll be busting up some Templars... but the mages in my Thedas won't be getting a free ride. Both will fall in line and a new order will arise from the ashes of both fanatical factions... or they won't rise again at all (of course, depending on what the writer's provide)

I'm most psyched about being called a traitor by other mages.

We shall see. You won't see mages returning to the Circle, of that I'm certain.

Perhaps not. Or maybe you will. We don't know. There are a lot of stories about heroes preserving the status quo. In Dragon Age Origins in Ferelden the status quo was "not destroyed by darkspawn."

Actually, narratively, the original status quo when coming into Origins was "Ferelden is under attack by darkspawn," and the plot is to make that stop happening. You don't go right back to that state again at the end.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

You could look at it either way I suppose. But my point still stands. Sometimes there is a threat and the hero averts the threat and preserves the world the way it was.

[Xilizhra]

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

You could look at it either way I suppose. But my point still stands. Sometimes there is a threat and the hero averts the threat and preserves the world the way it was.

The mage side carries too much of an edge with the fanbase to be made into the threat. The templars are more likely to be cast as such, in the form of the Red ones; even if some sort of order is left after that, they'll be too depleted to return to power.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

So the reason the mage rebellion can't fail is basically that fans don't want it to?