375 réponses à ce sujet

[Hazegurl]

www.youtube.com/watch= ending dialogue destroyed the base

www.youtube.com/watch= ending dialogue keeping base

www.youtube.com/watch = dialogue about the decision to keep or destroy

Some of the companions are total yes men while others seem consistent.

Samara and Miranda were the most consistent in destroying it. As well as Tali and Thane. They praise you for destroying it and don't if you keep it.

Garrus doesn't praise you for destroying it but if you hand it over he tells you to watch yourself.

Grunt agrees with TIM then praises you for destroying it and tells you that giving it  to TIM was weak if you keep it.

Jacob tells you to destroy it then praises you for keeping it.

Legion seemed almost neutral but if you keep it he will tell you that he hopes you don't use it. 

Mordin tells you to use it but seems to think it's impressive if you destroy it. But if you keep it he seems to disagree with the action.

Zaeed tells you to use it.

Kasumi is against using it.

Looks like other posters were thinking the same thing I was in giving the rundown of who agreed or not 

Modifié par Hazegurl, 28 novembre 2013 - 08:44 .

[XxPrincess(x)ThreatxX]

A thread about Morrigan & people are arguing about mass effect instead O_o

[ignoreality]

Bioware should make a separate Dragon Age: Mindless Slaughter game. Take a cheap generic FPS engine, slap in the NPCs from DA:O and DA2, generate some maps, equip the player with a number of gruesome murder weapons.

Outcome: psychos are happy, the rest can play DA:I in peace, Bioware gets extra money for nothing. Profit all around.

[Hazegurl]

Or maybe do what Gaider said they will do which is make most companions dismissible, like they should. Seems the most sensible imo. If players still choose to kill a character than so be it, if the option is there.

[Fredward]

I still want to brutally murder Sebastian. So bad. I'm thinking my chances aren't bad necessarily, since he'll probably be running around being all vengeance sweary and whatnot. Mage vs templar might not be the vocal point but I'll eat my boots if there isn't a quest or six that pertains to them in some way. Hopefully Sebastian will be brutally-murderable in one of them.

[Cainhurst Crow]

David7204 wrote...

It's perfectly reasonable for companions to approve of the player character succeeding. You ought to consider whether companions have 'no opinions' or if they simply share the opinions of the player character.

I have no interest in a team with half the people eagerly advocating cruelty and greed. Or a team where half the people respond positively to rudeness. It would just come off as ridiculous and cartoony. The developers would have enough difficulty justifying a single such companion. Let alone several.

your non-experience with dragon age is showing.

We have Zevran, Morrigan, Shale, Oghren, and occasionally Sten.

[Killdren88]

ignoreality wrote...

Bioware should make a separate Dragon Age: Mindless Slaughter game. Take a cheap generic FPS engine, slap in the NPCs from DA:O and DA2, generate some maps, equip the player with a number of gruesome murder weapons.

Outcome: psychos are happy, the rest can play DA:I in peace, Bioware gets extra money for nothing. Profit all around.

I support this.

[Direwolf0294]

David Gaider wrote...

My impression has always been that ANY character who doesn't put the player first above their own desires is betraying them. Those characters should realize the player is saving the world, or otherwise simply deserving of getting what they want, because the player can rationalize it.

In other words, it's another case of "I don't think that word means what you think it means." Calling it "betrayal" certainly makes it sound objectively worse than "they made me angry", however.

I'd say swearing to help the Warden and then abandoning them on the eve before the final battle counts as a betrayal.

Morrigan isn't just some misunderstood person who people don't like because she's not kissing up to you; she's  sadistic, manipulative and power hungry, and the world would be better off if the Inquisitor could stick a sword in her gut. We've killed characters for far less.

[Arakat]

Direwolf0294 wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

My impression has always been that ANY character who doesn't put the player first above their own desires is betraying them. Those characters should realize the player is saving the world, or otherwise simply deserving of getting what they want, because the player can rationalize it.

In other words, it's another case of "I don't think that word means what you think it means." Calling it "betrayal" certainly makes it sound objectively worse than "they made me angry", however.

I'd say swearing to help the Warden and then abandoning them on the eve before the final battle counts as a betrayal.

Morrigan isn't just some misunderstood person who people don't like because she's not kissing up to you; she's  sadistic, manipulative and power hungry, and the world would be better off if the Inquisitor could stick a sword in her gut. We've killed characters for far less.

She only leaves if the Warden refuses her ritual, and since the ritual is the only certain way to save the Warden from dying, she's essentially "abandoning" a lost cause. If you're likely going to die within the next 24 hours anyway, what good will her help do you at that point?

Modifié par arakat, 28 novembre 2013 - 10:49 .

[HiroVoid]

arakat wrote...

Direwolf0294 wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

My impression has always been that ANY character who doesn't put the player first above their own desires is betraying them. Those characters should realize the player is saving the world, or otherwise simply deserving of getting what they want, because the player can rationalize it.

In other words, it's another case of "I don't think that word means what you think it means." Calling it "betrayal" certainly makes it sound objectively worse than "they made me angry", however.

I'd say swearing to help the Warden and then abandoning them on the eve before the final battle counts as a betrayal.

Morrigan isn't just some misunderstood person who people don't like because she's not kissing up to you; she's  sadistic, manipulative and power hungry, and the world would be better off if the Inquisitor could stick a sword in her gut. We've killed characters for far less.

She only leaves if the Warden refuses her ritual, and since the ritual is the only certain way to save the Warden from dying, she's essentially "abandoning" a lost cause. If you're likely going to die within the next 24 hours anyway, what good will her help do you at that point?

Well, she abandons Ferelden by leaving as well, but "technically", it could have been Riordan to die. :innocent:

[Br3admax]

When did Morrigan swear to help anyone? And being sadistic, manipulative, and power hungry does not a basis for killing make. Not when said person has other uses. It's not their fault that you do not want to take advantage of them.

[Cainhurst Crow]

Morrigan made it clear she was out for her own goals and interest from the start, and that never changed throughout dragon age.

Getting mad at her for pursuing her own self interest, when she made it clear that was her goal from the start, seems rather like people weren't paying attention to who she was but what they could make her into.

[Dova]

Darth Brotarian wrote...
Morrigan made it clear she was out for her own goals and interest from the start

She wouldn't have even gone if Flemeth didn't force her to go with the Warden thus ^^ this. 

[Wulfram]

I don't think it's totally unreasonable to consider Morrigan's actions a betrayal. It's certainly an exceedingly crappy way to treat a friend.

Wanting to kill her over it is definitely overreacting though.

Though if your Inquisitor is pro-templar, they probably should want to kill Morrigan. Well, ideally to capture and imprision her, but who thinks that is going to happen? But it's hard to see how you could believe that mages are dangerous and need to be locked up, while being content to have her running around free doing maker knows what.

[Usergnome]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

I still want to brutally murder Sebastian. So bad. I'm thinking my chances aren't bad necessarily, since he'll probably be running around being all vengeance sweary and whatnot. Mage vs templar might not be the vocal point but I'll eat my boots if there isn't a quest or six that pertains to them in some way. Hopefully Sebastian will be brutally-murderable in one of them.

What?? WHY?

I mean, when I first played DA2 I dislike Sebastian because he was always living his life as the Chantry told him and yadadadadada.

But then, I just stopped to listen and you know what? He is a very friendly guy, righteous, kind, who wants the best for his people and everyone else. He found peace, even after his family threw him out and basically abandoned him, and he turned his life around. He is a good guy.

Why!?

[Lebanese Dude]

Usergnome wrote...
Why!?

I don't necessarily share their opinion, but it could be because he vowed eternal pain on Kirkwall if Anders wasn't killed. 

[HiroVoid]

Usergnome wrote...

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

I still want to brutally murder Sebastian. So bad. I'm thinking my chances aren't bad necessarily, since he'll probably be running around being all vengeance sweary and whatnot. Mage vs templar might not be the vocal point but I'll eat my boots if there isn't a quest or six that pertains to them in some way. Hopefully Sebastian will be brutally-murderable in one of them.

What?? WHY?

I mean, when I first played DA2 I dislike Sebastian because he was always living his life as the Chantry told him and yadadadadada.

But then, I just stopped to listen and you know what? He is a very friendly guy, righteous, kind, who wants the best for his people and everyone else. He found peace, even after his family threw him out and basically abandoned him, and he turned his life around. He is a good guy.

Why!?

Because he had a convo with Fenris about reporting Anders and Merrill to the templars which was probably meant to represent his inner struggle about his loyalty to the Chantry.  Personally, having Sebastian being on the side of the mages would actually be more useful than having a well known mass murderer in the mage ranks if Sebastian can retake Starkhaven giving the mages an allied city.

[HiroVoid]

Lebdood wrote...

Usergnome wrote...
Why!?

I don't necessarily share their opinion, but it could be because he vowed eternal pain on Kirkwall if Anders wasn't killed. 

I'm not really ready to judge that until I've seen him actually try it since I'm honestly of the opinion that might simply have been something he said in anger and without thinking about it since Anders just murdered the closest thing he had to a mother at this point.  Plus, any number of friends he had in the chantry.

Modifié par HiroVoid, 29 novembre 2013 - 12:26 .

[ManchesterUnitedFan1]

JusticarFlareon wrote...

This thread was fun to read. 10/10

TheBlackBaron wrote...

Why is it that in most threads about killing Morrigan, the proponents always seem to have awful grammar and a loose grip on sanity?

Off topic but 

MARINA OMFG

/offtopic

[Hazegurl]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

David7204 wrote...

It's perfectly reasonable for companions to approve of the player character succeeding. You ought to consider whether companions have 'no opinions' or if they simply share the opinions of the player character.

I have no interest in a team with half the people eagerly advocating cruelty and greed. Or a team where half the people respond positively to rudeness. It would just come off as ridiculous and cartoony. The developers would have enough difficulty justifying a single such companion. Let alone several.

your non-experience with dragon age is showing.

We have Zevran, Morrigan, Shale, Oghren, and occasionally Sten.

lol Seriously! The greatest thing about DAO is that I can play a basket case Warden rolling with my own crew of equally crazy nut jobs.

Edit: As for Sebastian, I didn't like him at first because of his conversion of Fenris but I got over it. Sebastian actually is a cool character and seriously, he's the first person to bring up the fact that two potentially dangerous mages are in your group and perhaps something ought to be done about that. I also think him vowing pain on Kirkwall is justified because he was so close to the grand Cleric but I think that when he calms down he will hunt Anders down and kill him along with Hawke. I support this. Anders is a freaking abomination and if you let him go then you've allowed him to roam free and unchecked to hurt many more people, both Mages and Templars alike.  

Modifié par Hazegurl, 29 novembre 2013 - 01:38 .

[Angrywolves]

some players just hate Morrigan , won't do the ritual, and want to kill , probably with a murder knife. Let them play DAI as an evil dude, kill Morrigan , Flemeth , Leliana, etc etc and deal with the consequences.

[t0mm06]

David Gaider wrote...

mx_keep13 wrote...
Why does the BSN want tot kill or romance everyone

I'm not sure which is more creepy, to be honest, the inevitable "will I get to romance them?" when any character is mentioned or the vaguely psychopathic "this character annoyed me at some point so I want to be able to slaughter them, even if it's with a new character who would know nothing about it".

We had a guy in a tabletop I was once in who did that. He'd roll a new character specifically to kill another party member who, in his mind, was responsible for his previous character's death. He was kind of a dick.

Anyway, yeah. Ultimately, the chances I would allow a character to be killed solely because the player might have some lingering grudge from two games ago? Nil. If it makes sense in the current story? Absolutely. If it doesn't make sense, will accusations of "plot armor" arise? Sure, and yet.

Also if you did let all the companions be killed i imagin some people would complain that 'all the rouges had minor character defects so i killed them..! And now i cant pick locks!, get it together Bioware and make it so i cant kill everyone all the time, Although you definatly shouldnt get rid of the feature to kill everone all the time, if you did that it would literally be the worst thing EVER!!!!' 

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Ryzaki wrote...

Legion's disagreement is consistent with his belief that accepting another technologies blinds you to alternate paths (It's not til ME3 that Legion starts betraying his characterization).

Legion's rationale for keeping the base is actually logical, whereas in destroying it, he resorts to purely symbolic BS.

Given that, is it any wonder he "betrayed" his former character? You can only sustain nonsense for so long.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 29 novembre 2013 - 02:40 .

[Karlone123]

Killdren88 wrote...

HiroVoid wrote...

Or Loghains life.

Might not have been around for it, but I don't know if I've heard someone blame Morrigan for someone dying per' se.  It's usually just for using them, holding out for info, leaving, etc.

Loghain is always dead at the end of my playthroughs. He is an idiot for letting Nationalism get in the way of what needed to be done.

Loghain would be useful now that the Orlessians are moving to try and claim back their lost "Province" of Ferelden.

On topic: I played my Warden yesterday to be indifferent about mages but deeply distrustful of Morrigan and Flemeth and goes by "better dead than sorry" cause both of them have plans for to either survive or manupulate whatever Flemeth was talking about in DA2.