Guest_StreetMagic_*
Alistair leading from behind? Isn't it the player's choice to even talk to him at all?
His secretive nature is no good to me though. But I don't really hold it against the character too much. More an annoyance with the pacing of the story. You only get to find out about Wardens in small increments. Not just Alistair. Riordan and Duncan as well. They never quite want to tell you how much your job sucks. lol
No I haven't played NeverWinter Nights, I meant in Thedas
Alistair leading from behind? Isn't it the player's choice to even talk to him at all?
His secretive nature is no good to me though. But I don't really hold it against the character too much. More an annoyance with the pacing of the story. You only get to find out about Wardens in small increments. Not just Alistair. Riordan and Duncan as well. They never quite want to tell you how much your job sucks. lol
Riordan needs some kind of stupidity award though. Crashing the landsmeet without discussing with the Warden earlier and keeping the information on how to kill the Archdemon made me seriously question his mental state.
Yeah, and the story can be made in a way that it makes sense to follow the plot even if you don't have a heroic agenda to save the world no?
Well the darkspawn threaten the entire world, regardless of what you want to do otherwise they'd ruin it eventually
Guest_StreetMagic_*
Well the darkspawn threaten the entire world, regardless of what you want to do otherwise they'd ruin it eventually
At the very least, it'll just smell bad.
Something worth fighting.
Irrelevant in what sense? Society? Humanity? People who stand for nothing and have no principles or morals don't change or influence anything.
Of course we're all irrelevant to the universe, but by that sense why even bother with anything anyway?
Riordan needs some kind of stupidity award though. Crashing the landsmeet without discussing with the Warden earlier and keeping the information on how to kill the Archdemon made me seriously question his mental state.
His "I thought you knew" was ridiculous, and then the fact that his game plan is to take only 3 Wardens into the fight is 100% nuts. Going into Denerim without a huge attempt to recruit more GWs out of basically anyone who is able to fight - legion of the dead, the Warden's own companions, etc. - is just comically incompetent.
His "I thought you knew" was ridiculous, and then the fact that his game plan is to take only 3 Wardens into the fight is 100% nuts. Going into Denerim without a huge attempt to recruit more GWs out of basically anyone who is able to fight - legion of the dead, the Warden's own companions, etc. - is just comically incompetent.
There was something of an epidemic of incompetence and stupidity going on in DA:O. Loghain's attempt at politics comes to mind. Then the Jowan debacle...
So egocentricity is your solution? I find that very bleak.There is no point to bother with anything unless you decide for yourself that something is important to you. But standing for nothing is no different than standing for something, and usually still means that you stand just for yourself.
So egocentricity is your solution? I find that very bleak.
We have countless obligations in life and not everything can be to our benefit.
Kain here decided long ago that he was a super deep great thinker (Probably after taking an indroductary philosophy class) so he pretty much always takes the contrarian option because nothing matters blah blah blah blah doom gloom puppies are useless blah.
Guest_TheDarkKnightReturns_*
I have nothing against 'good characters' unless they're self righteous like Wynne. And even then it's not that big a deal. Wynne was probably the most annoying. I found it remarkably hypocritical that she wanted the Warden to kill Avernus, but then chastises him for taking Ignacio's contracts.
Aveline and Alistair were fun to p!ss off though.
Guest_TheDarkKnightReturns_*
Riordan needs some kind of stupidity award though. Crashing the landsmeet without discussing with the Warden earlier and keeping the information on how to kill the Archdemon made me seriously question his mental state.
Well the Wardens are sworn to Masonic levels of secrecy so I'm not surprised that he would keep his mouth shut despite how inopportune (or stupid) it was. Not Conscripting more people into the Wardens (and allowing Alistair to leave) when the Archdemon was on Denerim's doorstep was probably his stupidest move.
Well the Wardens are sworn to Masonic levels of secrecy so I'm not surprised that he would keep his mouth shut despite how inopportune (or stupid) it was. Not Conscripting more people into the Wardens (and allowing Alistair to leave) when the Archdemon was on Denerim's doorstep was probably his stupidest move.
I think his committing suicide by lauching himself off a tower was his stupidest move. His actual gameplan was "hit a bullet with another bullet". The level of stupid involved in that move is epic.
I think the backlash comes more from the good guys who are boringly good--the ones who, like machines, make every decision in a predictably noble way, as if by programmed code. We can still have morally "good" characters that are interesting and can make interesting decisions and surprise us and all that. That's why I don't think the Starks really fit the bill for being boring, so I don't see why there's backlash against them, to be honest. (alright maybe ol' Ned can be boringly good sometimes, but we all know how that ended for him).
To elaborate, I'm talking about the Superman-esque good guys who are completely flawless, saving kittens from trees and rescuing hostages from evil bad guys, not killing innocents, yadayadayada. That's boring. That's predictable.
You can still have "good" characters who aren't boring. There are good characters who aren't boring--plenty of them. Tyrion Lannister, if we're talking game of thrones still. Or maybe Geralt from the witcher, or even Han Solo. (there are loads more but I'm lazy)
The only thing that can ever go wrong with any character is if they are boring. If people hate them for any other reason, there's nothing wrong
I think his committing suicide by lauching himself off a tower was his stupidest move. His actual gameplan was "hit a bullet with another bullet". The level of stupid involved in that move is epic.
Pretty sure he did that so you could actually fight him on top of fort drakon instead of it just raining down fire the entire battle. At least that's how I saw it.
So egocentricity is your solution?
Solution to what? Life? Yes.
Kain here decided long ago that he was a super deep great thinker (Probably after taking an indroductary philosophy class) so he pretty much always takes the contrarian option because nothing matters blah blah blah blah doom gloom puppies are useless blah.
And Admiral decided that he is not going to listen to my comments regarding any of this, and is going to paint his own picture about me in his head and call it good.
Lost count how many times I've said, that I haven't taken any philosophy classes.
I think the backlash comes more from the good guys who are boringly good--the ones who, like machines, make every decision in a predictably noble way, as if by programmed code. We can still have morally "good" characters that are interesting and can make interesting decisions and surprise us and all that. That's why I don't think the Starks really fit the bill for being boring, so I don't see why there's backlash against them, to be honest. (alright maybe ol' Ned can be boringly good sometimes, but we all know how that ended for him).
To elaborate, I'm talking about the Superman-esque good guys who are completely flawless, saving kittens from trees and rescuing hostages from evil bad guys, not killing innocents, yadayadayada. That's boring. That's predictable.
You can still have "good" characters who aren't boring. There are good characters who aren't boring--plenty of them. Tyrion Lannister, if we're talking game of thrones still. Or maybe Geralt from the witcher, or even Han Solo. (there are loads more but I'm lazy)
The only thing that can ever go wrong with any character is if they are boring. If people hate them for any other reason, there's nothing wrong
I don't think there's anything inherently boring about nobility. The trick is simply finding the appropriate conflicts that pique one's interest. Conflict with no obviously "right" solution (a "white" shoved into a "grey" scenario), complacency in what seems routine, inability to give opponents the benefit of a doubt, temptations away from one's principles, making genuine errors and the consequences thereof... those sorts of things. Check out Justice League Unlimited episodes "For the Man Who Has Everything" and "Clash" - good examples of how to make Superman NOT boring.
Guest_Raga_*
I like good characters. The thing I don't like are characters with capital C causes. Like Anders or Velanna. Characters that are so caught up in their tunnel vision of personal injustice that they refuse to acknowledge that other things also matter.
I also don't like characters with *no* morals, whose philosophy is pretty much "do whatever because you feel like it" and/or Darwinian.
good characters are boring there concept has been done to death.
I like good characters. The thing I don't like are characters with capital C causes. Like Anders or Velanna. Characters that are so caught up in their tunnel vision of personal injustice that they refuse to acknowledge that other things also matter.
I also don't like characters with *no* morals, whose philosophy is pretty much "do whatever because you feel like it" and/or Darwinian.
I actually tend to like the former set; they gave me the same dark thrill that some people get out of ordinary villainy, but they also tend to be good people who've been driven too far, so it's a doubly effective package. I haven't romanced any, but in this context, I almost wish I was a gay man so I could have romanced Anders.
Guest_Raga_*
I did do a rivalmance with Anders which made me like him about 100% more, or rather just feel sympathy for how far gone he was. I also romanced Fenris who is another character like this, but that didn't really improve my opinion of him.
In these forums there are many "burn it down" folks who know people like something and feel the need to denigrate or destroy it. I have trouble taking them seriously. It's weird that people complain about the ME3 ending because it couldn't be perfectly good enough (Shep survives, world saved), and then complaineveryone is too nice.
I like how characters in DA2 were written, all of them wanted to improve the world, even Carver who couldn't get over his jealousy- but this is what made the characters and Kirkwall interesting- the blindspots, the dueling ideas of what was right with no clear answer. Evil characters are boring, they have no basis for their actions outside selfishness. Good characters who have no problems doing the right thing and that thing always working out might be boring because there is no reality or struggle in that, butit sits better with me as it is fantasy and that is the world I'd most prefer. However, that is not the world of Dragon Age. Mages vs. Templars- no right answer and heroes on both sides, Orsino vs Meredith both went too far to protect their charges. Within all this it is nice to have someone who believes the best in people and the world in all this gray and confusion- it makes the lights lighter and the darks darker.
I'm gonna come right out and say it.
Much like Sten and Morrigan, a lot of the Wynne hate stemmed from the fact that she didn't bow down and kiss the Warden's toes and agree with every decision he made -- she dared to have her own opinions, speaking up and criticizing the Warden whenever he did something that she had an issue with.
A lot of players, being immersed as the big hero of the story, want to be right all the time, and it's jarring for them to encounter an NPC who challenges that mindset.
Guest_Raga_*
Morrigan got on my nerves because she approved when I murdered random people and stole candy from babies.
Retour en haut