301 réponses à ce sujet

[KaiserShep]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Give me someone like Hawke any day. After ME3, leaving ME behind and getting back into DA2 felt like leaving a torturing chamber and getting out into the open air again, and that applies to both DAO and DA2 and their protagonists. 

I hate to say this, but as much as I love the Mass Effect series, Dragon Age in general really is more fulfilling when it comes to controlling the PC and interacting with companions, by an unexpectedly wide margin. Typically I lean more on science fiction over medieval fantasy, but I guess that didn't really make a difference in the end.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 06 février 2014 - 09:42 .

[wright1978]

KaiserShep wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

The only moment I can think of off the top of my head that Hawke might be considered egregiously stupid would be the Tallis situation... Though personally my Hawke didn't care enough to stop her and its mostly on Bioware for not allowing the option to try.

Yeah, this is one of those moments where it only really suits those who characterizes their Hawke as one who couldn't care less about that sort of thing (which I do), but other than that, I felt that Hawke was generally pretty solid.

There's the moment with the blood mage Huon and his wife where Hawke sits back and watches whilst dude murders his own wife rather than intervening. That though maybe really poor cinemtography.

[KaiserShep]

That one is a bit shaky, but a lot of those problems have to do with the false sense of scale we get in Kirkwall in general. Like fights break out with bandits in the narrow streets of Lowtown, but you can plainly see random denizens just standing there even while limbs are flying. And of course we have cut scenes triggered seemingly later than they should be, like that instance with Huon.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 06 février 2014 - 09:46 .

[Heimdall]

KaiserShep wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Give me someone like Hawke any day. After ME3, leaving ME behind and getting back into DA2 felt like leaving a torturing chamber and getting out into the open air again, and that applies to both DAO and DA2 and their protagonists. 

I hate to say this, but as much as I love the Mass Effect series, Dragon Age in general really is more fulfilling when it comes to controlling the PC and interacting with companions, by an unexpectedly wide margin. Typically I lean more on science fiction over medieval fantasy, but I guess that didn't really make a difference in the end.

I very much agree.  I wonder at the disparity.  Maybe it has something to do with how mission focused ME is?  I mean, as a military Space Opera and a quasi-shooter it sort of focuses everything on clearly defined missions rather than all the wandering around the countryside with close companions associated with the fantasy genre.  Maybe that influenced them.

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 06 février 2014 - 09:52 .

[Heimdall]

KaiserShep wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

The only moment I can think of off the top of my head that Hawke might be considered egregiously stupid would be the Tallis situation... Though personally my Hawke didn't care enough to stop her and its mostly on Bioware for not allowing the option to try.

Yeah, this is one of those moments where it only really suits those who characterizes their Hawke as one who couldn't care less about that sort of thing (which I do), but other than that, I felt that Hawke was generally pretty solid.

Honestly, I sort of designed my Hawke's personality to make moments like that work on later runs.

[Ieldra]

Lord Aesir wrote...

KaiserShep wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Give me someone like Hawke any day. After ME3, leaving ME behind and getting back into DA2 felt like leaving a torturing chamber and getting out into the open air again, and that applies to both DAO and DA2 and their protagonists. 

I hate to say this, but as much as I love the Mass Effect series, Dragon Age in general really is more fulfilling when it comes to controlling the PC and interacting with companions, by an unexpectedly wide margin. Typically I lean more on science fiction over medieval fantasy, but I guess that didn't really make a difference in the end.

I very much agree.  I wonder at the disparity.  Maybe it has something to do with how mission focused ME is?  I mean, as a military Space Opera and a quasi-shooter it sort of focuses everything on clearly defined missions rather than all the wandering around the countryside with close companions associated with the fantasy genre.  Maybe that influenced them.

I think it was a deliberate decision. I've heard they wanted to make ME3 as movie-like as it is possible for a game to be. Unfortunately, they copied a primary flaw of the medium - contrived drama at the cost of consistency and common sense - while sacrificing much of the freedom which should be the hallmark of a game in favor of a more defined protagonist and cinematic presentation.

As for "wandering the countryside": ME1 had that, so it's not specific to the fantasy genre.

IMO, every Bioware developer should have a note pinned to their desktop saying "A video game is not a movie". While the new cinematic scene design didn't damage Hawke much compared to Shepard, you notice the beginnings in several scenes, and I can see things drifting off in that direction all too easily in future titles. Dramatic tension is sometimes necessary and often desirable, but it should not have priority over lore consistency, the players' freedom to express their characters, plausible plots and common sense.

[Heimdall]

Ieldra2 wrote...

I think it was a deliberate decision. I've heard they wanted to make ME3 as movie-like as it is possible for a game to be. Unfortunately, they copied a primary flaw of the medium - contrived drama at the cost of consistency and common sense - while sacrificing much of the freedom which should be the hallmark of a game in favor of a more defined protagonist and cinematic presentation.

As for "wandering the countryside": ME1 had that, so it's not specific to the fantasy genre.

I was thinking more in terms of general approach to the companion dialogue.  And I'd say ME was the least egregious offender of the three on this issue.

[Lotion Soronarr]

KaiserShep wrote...

Saying that the Arishok would have died at Kirkwall regardless of Hawke is the same as saying that Kaidan or Ashley would have saved the galaxy just as well as Shepard if he/she did not pull him/her from the beacon on Eden Prime. It's simply not possible to know for certain.

He would have died. For certain.

There's no way a single ship can take over an entire city.
A city where a order of knight temaplrs and a circle of mages is stationed.

Oh, and the ship in question was shipwereck, causing loss of personell and material, not to mention desertion and losses over the years in Kirkwall.

The Arishok was suicidal. He and his qunari would have been crushed utterly in the end.

[KaiserShep]

Fair enough. I've been looking for any info in the wiki, but according to the Viscount, the Arishok came to Kirkwall with a few hundred men. I assume that a qunari dreadnought holds quite a few people, but I see no information on the actual capacity of a single ship.

[TurretSyndrome]

Hawke is a failure version of Shepard. The guy was always bogged down by fate and couldn't accomplish anything in his life. He also didn't have any galaxy-scale missions like Shepard either. Just protect your family and provide a good living for them. 2 minutes into the game, BAM!, guy loses his sibling.

Not saying everything is fault or anything. In fact, unless he took his sibling into the deep roads against the protesting of his mother, everything happened because he was unlucky, or because he was fate's ****. By the end of Act 2, the guy loses everyone he cared for, one way or another, and one top of that, gets dragged into all sorts of conflicts.

This is one of two main reasons why I disliked Hawke's story. I know that a lot of people want humanized characters in their RPGs these days(it seems to be like what's hip now), and not some guy who is "special" than others, "blessed by god" or something, but the reason I am fine with being the "chosen one" is because those characters never make you feel pathetic. Those characters don't have the kind of failure rate you have in your real life, so it feels refreshing. Hawke on the other hand ugh...

Too bad Bioware doesn't want to make its protagonists the "chosen one" type anymore, especially in Dragon Age. The last time I got that feel is in DA:O, but that was also the last time I could really role play, thanks to no constraints to conversations and more character control. After DA 2, I decided to just use whatever default face they come up with in Inquisition and play it like a movie, rather than actually put some effort in creating a character. I knew they were going for the more cinematic feel and that I'll never see another DA:O type game which offers the same amount of freedom anymore, and I was right.

Modifié par TurretSyndrome, 07 février 2014 - 02:10 .

[KaiserShep]

Ironically, Shepard was bogged down by fate as well. Anyway, it seems like BioWare is doomed to exist in a damned if you do, damed if you don't area. People want smaller scale heroics and a more humanized story, but they also want god-mode characters that can decide who gets the seat of power in an entire kingdom on a line of dialogue alone. There's no winning.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 07 février 2014 - 02:53 .

[Teddie Sage]

TurretSyndrome wrote...

Hawke is a another version of Shepard.

Shepard couldn't save the galaxy without making a sacrifice, himself or another race. I don't think Shepard was the better hero. Both are "failures" on their own.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

 Only issue I have with Hawke is that it feels like her character growth peaks at "glorified mercenary" after Act 1.

For all the wealth/status, she's still going around doing odd jobs and solving problems through killing like before.

Aveline at 100% rivalry calls her a "highwayman who stumbled into being Champion," and it's a fair assessment IMO!

[KaiserShep]

I've yet to go full rivalry on some of these characters. I guess I should try it out on my next playthrough.

[TurretSyndrome]

KaiserShep wrote...

Ironically, Shepard was bogged down by fate as well. Anyway, it seems like BioWare is doomed to exist in a damned if you do, damed if you don't area. People want smaller scale heroics and a more humanized story, but they also want god-mode characters that can decide who gets the seat of power in an entire kingdom on a line of dialogue alone. There's no winning.

Shepard wasn't exactly fate's **** though, atleast nowhere near as much as Hawke was. Shepard had a lot of things in control than Hawke ever did, which is why whatever he achived at the end, he did so through his actions. 

You can have humanized stories while characters are the "chosen one" types, there are many games like thatwith that combination. What I'm annoyed by, these days, is that people absolutely don't want any semblence of the "special" characteristics in their protagonists. They want characters like Hawke who are weak, and who have to put up with failure every now and then, like in real life. 

But whatever, that's just my opinion. I play video games to get away from life's crap and it gives me a headache if I see the same kind of crap when playing my games too.

Teddie Sage wrote...
Shepard couldn't save the galaxy without making a sacrifice, himself or another race. I don't think Shepard was the better hero. Both are "failures" on their own.

While Shepard had to make a few sacrifices to save the galaxy, Hawke lost a lot and gained nothing but get out alive and alone. Hawke is a failure version of Shepard.

Modifié par TurretSyndrome, 07 février 2014 - 04:23 .

[Aaleel]

KaiserShep wrote...

Ironically, Shepard was bogged down by fate as well. Anyway, it seems like BioWare is doomed to exist in a damned if you do, damed if you don't area. People want smaller scale heroics and a more humanized story, but they also want god-mode characters that can decide who gets the seat of power in an entire kingdom on a line of dialogue alone. There's no winning.

that's not really true at all, I think people want something between all powerful and powerless.  There's plenty of room in there.  

[SgtSteel91]

TurretSyndrome wrote...

While Shepard had to make a few sacrifices to save the galaxy, Hawke lost a lot and gained nothing but get out alive and alone. 

You can get out of Kirkwall with your companions and sibling alive or even become Viscount at the end.

Modifié par SgtSteel91, 07 février 2014 - 04:29 .

[KaiserShep]

The Viscount ending is shaky because Hawke is only there temporarily, since Cassandra is interrogating Varric in his/her house.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 07 février 2014 - 04:29 .

[SgtSteel91]

Doesn't change the fact that Hawke can 'win' at the end. But I guess it depends on how much 'winning' means to the player. Is it getting out alive with your friends and family? Saving the Gallows Mages? Becoming powerful? Stopping the Annulment before it killed people?

Modifié par SgtSteel91, 07 février 2014 - 04:31 .

[TurretSyndrome]

SgtSteel91 wrote...

You can get out of Kirkwall with your companions and sibling alive or even become Viscount at the end.

The estate and the Viscount title are temporary. The sibling is lost to Grey Wardens/Circle/Templar order. 

SgtSteel91 wrote...

Doesn't change the fact that Hawke can 'win' at the end.

It's not a 'win'. I guess it depends on what the player considers a win, and I guess getting out alive with your clothes on, is a win for some.

Modifié par TurretSyndrome, 07 février 2014 - 04:33 .

[Teddie Sage]

TurretSyndrome wrote...

While Shepard had to make a few sacrifices to save the galaxy, Hawke lost a lot and gained nothing but get out alive and alone.

Let's just agree to disagree then, because I surely don't agree with your point of view.

[TurretSyndrome]

Teddie Sage wrote...

Let's just agree to disagree then, because I surely don't agree with your point of view.

All I'm saying is that, whatever Shepard sacrificed paid off. He got what he wanted in the end, destruction/synthesis/control or defeat. It's fine if you disagree.

[KaiserShep]

TurretSyndrome wrote...

SgtSteel91 wrote...

You can get out of Kirkwall with your companions and sibling alive or even become Viscount at the end.

The estate and the Viscount title are temporary. The sibling is lost to Grey Wardens/Circle/Templar order.

The ending is not very clear on what the sibling does at the end of the battle. I took Bethany back into the group of 4 for the final battle, and Hawke is seen leaving the Gallows with her, Varric and Isabela, though Varric evidently stayed in Kirkwall, since Cassandra was interrogating him there.

SgtSteel91 wrote...

Doesn't change the fact that Hawke can 'win' at the end.

It's not a 'win'. I guess it depends on what the player considers a win, and I guess getting out alive with your clothes on, is a win for some.

I suppose that's fair. For myself, Hawke getting out of that city and running off with Isabela as planned seems like a good enough trade.

[Teddie Sage]

TurretSyndrome wrote...

Teddie Sage wrote...

Let's just agree to disagree then, because I surely don't agree with your point of view.

All I'm saying is that, whatever Shepard sacrificed paid off. He got what he wanted in the end, destruction/synthesis/control or defeat. It's fine if you disagree.

Here I'm saying that I disagree that he was a failure. Different strikes for different folks. Every heroes out there can be failures, because everything about this franchise is optional and subjective. Yet everyone throw out their opinions around as if they were facts and are inconsiderate about other forumers' feelings.

[KaiserShep]

It's all good. I cared more about winning against Danarius than I cared about staying Champion of Kirkwall.