Well, Alistair does get pretty pissed off if you let Loghain live. Either you make him king or he goes off and becomes a drunk. I guess that's kind of a big deal. I've never romanced him and done this, does he actually forgive you later if you make him king?
He doesn't. If you try going for the 'what about us' option he'll shut you down and make it clear he's no longer interested in her at all.
However, the Keep allows you to spare Loghain and become Alistair's mistress. Could be a bug though.
However, the Keep allows you to spare Loghain and become Alistair's mistress. Could be a bug though.
I tried this and couldn't, the Keep always forced me to pick one. If Loghain lived I could not pick to have stayed lovers.
Hmmm, how "wrong" one perceives a decision depends on the person, I guess. I would call driving Tali into suicide in ME3 a VERY bad decision. You fucked up so bad that you got your squadmate, maybe even lover (!), killed. That scene is brutal. I felt like a piece of **** on that worst scenario playthrough. Obviously Bioware wanted you to make peace between the quarians and the geth. The "right" way would be to get on everyone's good side, get them to work together. Correct past mistakes like the genophage. Of course if you decide not to do these things, the game gives you a valid excuse. But especially Mass Effect presents you a not so subtle idea of what an honorable Shepard should do. Surely it's no coincidence that a full renegade who didn't get enough support doesn't get the breathing scene at the end and is not given all three choices. There is NO choice at all. Only one way to end it. That's as blunt as Bioware will ever tell the player that they screwed up.
Yes, but I did not want to discuss if he thinks it's right or not. He of course thinks it's right. But I can think I am right and still regret it because it was just not worth the price I had to pay.
Well I said more than that in the quote, but I mentioned it because I think it's important to why he wouldn't regret it.
If it was justice, from my point of view, the price of their death doesn't matter, it was just something that had to be done, no regrets. Which is why I don't think he thought twice about it after.
True, good point. Solas does not favor Cole to kill out of revenge, though in fact it is the same thing. But when it comes to Cole, he sees that Cole would not get better by doing it. That instead he would only add more negativity on the pile of pain he already has to deal with. So I am so surprised he does not do this for himself, especially how even later on he does not notice it and questions his action.
I am not so sure what I think the answers to your questions are. Does he hold spirits in higher regard and thinks "physical entities" could not reach that level? I don't know. I also just wondered, does Cole's quest always happen after Solas's or is another order possible? Maybe he acts about Cole this way because of his own personal quest? In case we stopped him from killing them, he realizes (later) that this was indeed better; while if we let him kill them, he later notices how it did not do him any good?
I was just thinking that if Cole's personal quest isn't necessarily about right and wrong, but about being distracted from one's purpose, then if Solas strives for the same purity of purpose that he attributes to spirits, then depending on what Solas believes his own true purpose is could affect how he feels about killing the mages. If Solas feels that killing the mages aligns with his personal purpose, then he might not regret those actions in the long run. On the other hand, if killing the mages distracts from or doesn't align with his purpose, he might come to regret it.
Well, I'm never going to do that then. I only let Loghain live once, with my a-hole male mage. He didn't care if Alistair hated him.
Oh that's right, I forgot that Goldanna isn't really Alistair's sister, but still... He was so happy about meeting her and he just had to be a ****** to him. I wanted to hug him so bad after that. Good thing I got the hug mod for my PC version. :-P
Hmmm, how "wrong" one perceives a decision depends on the person, I guess. I would call driving Tali into suicide in ME3 a VERY bad decision. You fucked up so bad that you got your squadmate, maybe even lover (!), killed. That scene is brutal. I felt like a piece of **** on that worst scenario playthrough. Obviously Bioware wanted you to make peace between the quarians and the geth. The "right" way would be to get on everyone's good side, get them to work together. Correct past mistakes like the genophage. Of course if you decide not to do these things, the game gives you a valid excuse. But especially Mass Effect presents you a not so subtle idea of what an honorable Shepard should do. Surely it's no coincidence that a full renegade who didn't get enough support doesn't get the breathing scene at the end and is not given all three choices. There is NO choice at all. Only one way to end it. That's as blunt as Bioware will ever tell the player that they screwed up.
Wow...I had no idea that Tali could kill herself. I love Tali...how could anyone make her do that? That's horrible!! I want to go play ME3 now and give her a hug.
Hmmm, how "wrong" one perceives a decision depends on the person, I guess. I would call driving Tali into suicide in ME3 a VERY bad decision. You fucked up so bad that you got your squadmate, maybe even lover (!), killed. That scene is brutal. I felt like a piece of **** on that worst scenario playthrough. Obviously Bioware wanted you to make peace between the quarians and the geth.
What happens then, does one of my men turn away from me or betray me or at least call me out?
I was not aware until now that I could get her to suicide.
But I don't even mean BW to punish me. I want my companions to punish me. To suddenly change their opinion of me, to leave me, or call me out. Stuff like that. Just how people in real life would be. You hurt somebody, he leaves. You don't apologize, he holds a grudge. You say something mean, he will not speak to you anymore. Stuff like that. Currently I must take multiple actions to reach that state. But I would find it much more interesting if a single action could trigger relationships to change drastically.
I tried this and couldn't, the Keep always forced me to pick one. If Loghain lived I could not pick to have stayed lovers.
This was pretty early on in the Keep's public release. I probably shouldn't have reported that bug.
Yes, I can see that. But I don't even need them to tell me that what I did was awful. I can judge that myself and I have made decisions in the games that I felt were awful or I even regretted later. But they could punish me more often for decisions. Like Wynne/Leliana leaving, which I just remembered. So I simply want a bit more realism. Maybe even people falling out with me over something without me even having done something awful, just because that would be realistic. Either I send companions away or I work hard for making them leave. But I never get a realistic approach somehow.
But maybe I just want a Breaking Bad style game at this moment.
Oh, I agree. There are no such scenarios in the games. Only decisions that you KNOW will not go down well with certain companions. It's like those bad decisions have a giant flashing warning sign. There are grave consequences when you do something that offends their very being. It usually ends in having to kill them. Edit: So they DO react. But their reaction is in a sort of vacuum and doesn't affect how the others see you. Often being as ass to them doesn't even change them thinking you're the greatest person on earth. It's not as ridiculous in DA as it is in ME, but still.
But I too would like more possibilities to screw up without knowing. Things that come back to bite you in the ass in very unexpected ways. (And yes, Breaking Bad was one of the rare shows where you never knew what was going to happen next.)
Sadly, I feel like a lot of people would not appreciate such gameplay. Imagine the rants at a bad ending after 40 hours just because you made a minor mistake without realizing it at the beginning of the game? Yes, it would be realistic. I'd love it. But if there's one thing I've learned is that many gamers are control freaks and do no like things being out of their control (see Hawke) ever. It's this whole power fantasy people get off on. They call the shots. Nothing they do is ever wrong.
(I hope I didn't offend anybody... just my impression, not directed at anybody in particular.)
I think Miranda says thank you when you don't let her kill her friend..umm.. I can't think of his name. But he dies anyway. And Mordin says thank you when you don't let him kill his old colleague...maybe.
Does Fenris say it when you don't let him kiil his sister?
Fenris doesn't mention anything to Hawke. Merrill has banter where she asks if he regrets how things turned out with his sister, and he says something along the lines of "What's done is done, no amount of wishing will change that." I got this banter both with killing her and letting her go.
What happens then, does one of my men turn away from me or betray me or at least call me out?
I was not aware until now that I could get her to suicide.
But I don't even mean BW to punish me. I want my companions to punish me. To suddenly change their opinion of me, to leave me, or call me out. Stuff like that. Just how people in real life would be. You hurt somebody, he leaves. You don't apologize, he holds a grudge. You say something mean, he will not speak to you anymore. Stuff like that. Currently I must take multiple actions to reach that state. But I would find it much more interesting if a single action could trigger relationships to change drastically.
Drunk Alistair definitely comes to mind. I guess Wynne and Leliana will attack you if you defile the Sacred Ashes. Shale turns against you if you try to preserve the Anvil. In DAO, a lot of companions tried to convince you to change your decisions, like when Zevran tries to convince you not to attack the Dalish. It seemed like in DAI, companions would disapprove after the fact, but rarely speak up beforehand.
Oh, I agree. There are no such scenarios in the games. Only decisions that you KNOW will not go down well with certain companions. It's like those bad decisions have a giant flashing warning sign. There are grave consequences when you do something that offends their very being. It usually ends in having to kill them.
But I too would like more possibilities to screw up without knowing. Things that come back to bite you in the ass in very unexpected ways. (And yes, Breaking Bad was one of the rare shows where you never knew what was going to happen next.)
Sadly, I feel like a lot of people would not appreciate such gameplay. Imagine the rants at a bad ending after 40 hours just because you made a minor mistake without realizing it at the beginning of the game? Yes, it would be realistic. I'd love it. But if there's one thing I've learned is that many gamers are control freaks and do no like things being out of their control (see Hawke) ever. It's this whole power fantasy people get off on. They call the shots. Nothing they do is ever wrong.
(I hope I didn't offend anybody... just my impression, not directed at anybody in particular.)
I personally do like when things don't go as expected sometimes, but I agree that there are quite a lot of players who don't like that at all. Softening Leliana in DAI comes to mind, as well as who becomes Divine. A lot of players want complete control over that stuff which is fine, but I'm not one of them.
Sadly, I feel like a lot of people would not appreciate such gameplay. Imagine the rants at a bad ending after 40 hours just because you made a minor mistake without realizing it at the beginning of the game? Yes, it would be realistic. I'd love it. But if there's one thing I've learned is that many gamers are control freaks and do no like things being out of their control (see Hawke) ever. It's this whole power fantasy people get off on. They call the shots. Nothing they do is ever wrong.
I fear you are right.
I liked the everybody loses ending in DA2. It was not enough, but I liked being helpless. I liked that no matter what I had done, everything would end up in ruins. I would have liked it to go much further, actually. A complete "we placed our chips in all the right spots and still lost" situation.
But I also know many people dislike that.
I think it's an "invalid" argument, because people could just replay and make another decision at that point in order to get a "good" ending. But you are right that they would complain still. Actually, I can only agree with everything you said.
I fear you are right.
I liked the everybody loses ending in DA2. It was not enough, but I liked being helpless. I liked that no matter what I had done, everything would end up in ruins. I would have liked it to go much further, actually. A complete "we placed our chips in all the right spots and still lost" situation.
But I also know many people dislike that.
I think it's an "invalid" argument, because people could just replay and make another decision at that point in order to get a "good" ending. But you are right that they would complain still. Actually, I can only agree with everything you said.
I don't mind there being negative consequences for actions taken in a game. That would be fine. But if you're going to lose no matter what you do then why bother doing anything at all? So, yeah I hated that no matter what I did everything sucked in the end because then why did I even bother to begin with?
I personally do like when things don't go as expected sometimes, but I agree that there are quite a lot of players who don't like that at all. Softening Leliana in DAI comes to mind, as well as who becomes Divine. A lot of players want complete control over that stuff which is fine, but I'm not one of them.
I liked (and hated) that all it took to "harden" Leliana was a decision made/not made near the start of the game. At that point I didn't feel like my girl was leader. Bull asks her who leads and she firmly points at Cassandra with all her fingers and toes, it wasn't her place to tell Leliana how to deal with her suborinates, especially considering it was regarding a traitor, and in an area she's got bugger all expertise on. It was a good indicator of assertiveness giving you a reward, namely "softened" Leliana.
I fear you are right.
I liked the everybody loses ending in DA2. It was not enough, but I liked being helpless. I liked that no matter what I had done, everything would end up in ruins. I would have liked it to go much further, actually. A complete "we placed our chips in all the right spots and still lost" situation.
But I also know many people dislike that.
I think it's an "invalid" argument, because people could just replay and make another decision at that point in order to get a "good" ending. But you are right that they would complain still. Actually, I can only agree with everything you said.
ME3's "**** you Godchild" ending springs to mind with this. 
No matter how well you do, you'll still lose if you pick it.
I don't mind there being negative consequences for actions taken in a game. That would be fine. But if you're going to lose no matter what you do then why bother doing anything at all? So, yeah I hated that no matter what I did everything sucked in the end because then why did I even bother to begin with?
I ask myself that so often in life. 
Maybe that is why I "enjoy" it. Like a sad movie or something. Seeing reality reflected in a game. I have done many things in life I later regretted, I have lost people because I was too proud to forgive, I suffered consequences for making bad decisions, and sometimes I've had to deal with bad situations without having done anything wrong. It's life and I appreciate a game that dares go there and present me the same issues.
But I do understand players who want to be able to win. So I don't say I want a game that forced "my" endings on everybody. I want games that have that option, but of course there should also be a "right" way to get to a happy end.
I don't mind there being negative consequences for actions taken in a game. That would be fine. But if you're going to lose no matter what you do then why bother doing anything at all? So, yeah I hated that no matter what I did everything sucked in the end because then why did I even bother to begin with?
I'm with you. That's probably the reason why (amongst other things) I didn't like DA2 very much and why my Hawke is my least favorite among all the DA protagonists. 
<snip>
ME3's "**** you Godchild" ending springs to mind with this.
Ugh! Memories of the ME3 ending are flooding back to me. The pain, the disappointment, the depression... Never want to have something like that happen again. 
I ask myself that so often in life.
But I do understand players who want to be able to win. So I don't say I want a game that forced "my" endings on everybody. I want games that have that option, but of course there should also be a "right" way to get to a happy end.
The only game I've ever played that came close to a "we placed our chips in all the right spots and still lost" situation was Final Fantasy XIII-2. That was the most depressing game I've ever played. 
I ask myself that so often in life.
But I do understand players who want to be able to win. So I don't say I want a game that forced "my" endings on everybody. I want games that have that option, but of course there should also be a "right" way to get to a happy end.
That's kind of the opposite of why I play games hehe. I rather like being a hero and escaping grim reality. So, losing not matter what just makes me go eh, I'll go play a game where I can actually accomplish something. But I agree, there should be many options for a game to end. Sad, happy ... there's no "right" way. Well, for me the "right" way would be happy but for others it would not. And both preferences should be represented as long as it fits the story.
I fear you are right.
I liked the everybody loses ending in DA2. It was not enough, but I liked being helpless. I liked that no matter what I had done, everything would end up in ruins. I would have liked it to go much further, actually. A complete "we placed our chips in all the right spots and still lost" situation.
But I also know many people dislike that.
I think it's an "invalid" argument, because people could just replay and make another decision at that point in order to get a "good" ending. But you are right that they would complain still. Actually, I can only agree with everything you said.
Yes, I thought DA2 was a refreshing change from the usual hero-saves-the-day story. I never had an issue with Hawke and the plot of DA2 (only with map recycling and such). I too loved it that Hawke failed. That one man/woman cannot prevent tragedy. I thought that was rather realistic. DA2 is a really dark depressing game. Much more so than DAO. I loved that companions had their own agenda and went through with it regardless of what you did. Sure, it's kind of frustrating. We WANT to sway people, make them agree with us. We want to feel like our way is the best way, the only right way to do things. DA2 was the closest to realism Bioware got.
It was an experiment that was not well received, sadly. People didn't just have issues with the rushed feel of the game (which was deserved criticism imo). Nobody liked playing a hero who couldn't stop the terrorist.
Now in DAI with Solas we have another Anders type of character with his own deceptive agenda. But Bioware learned from DA2 and made the betrayal happen before the inquisitor was around. In fact, quizzie is the shining hero again who actually FIXES Solas' screw-up. And also fixes the Hawke situation. Hawke failed to stop Anders, but the inquisitor is there to set things straight again, end the mage rebellion. All nice and tidy at the end of the game...
Whatever happens with Solas in the next game is probably not the inquisitor's concern anymore. At some point, one of the playable heroes will deal with him. And probably in a satisfying in-control way.
I'm with you. That's probably the reason why I didn't like DA2 very much and why my Hawke is my least favorite among all the DA protagonists.
Ugh! Memories of the ME3 ending are flooding back to me. The pain, the disappointment, the depression... Never want to have something like that happen again.
I finished DA2 for the first time last night and I loved it. D: I'm so glad I made Alistair king on my Origins run now, the thought of having to choose between him and my Hawke would be impossible now I have live context behind my Hawke. There's no way I could do that to either HoF or Fenris, and Stroud peeved me off so getting to leave him behind won't be a big deal at all. Satisfying, if anything. 
Have you tried the Happy Ending mod? Assuming you're on PC? I haven't looked it up for a while, and from what I remember it's a bit clunky and recycles past dialogue... but it's beautiful. *wipes tear* I'm seriously contemplating buying the ME series all over again so I can experience that mod and finally have my headcanon realized. 
I was just thinking that if Cole's personal quest isn't necessarily about right and wrong, but about being distracted from one's purpose, then if Solas strives for the same purity of purpose that he attributes to spirits, then depending on what Solas believes his own true purpose is could affect how he feels about killing the mages. If Solas feels that killing the mages aligns with his personal purpose, then he might not regret those actions in the long run. On the other hand, if killing the mages distracts from or doesn't align with his purpose, he might come to regret it.
Cole is a spirit of compassion and Solas remarks how rare such spirits are... If Cole were allowed to kill the templar then that may impair his status and Solas would consider that a loss. As for Solas, I think he might consider himself to be above such things.
Retour en haut
