839 réponses à ce sujet

[Allan Schumacher]

Yeah, but it is also a game, which implies it can be "won". Most people would see the happy ending as "winning the game".

The idea of "winning" is often used to support the idea of having the happy ending.  That people want to feel that they have won (which is fine and reasonable enough of a perspective to have)

 

 

The thing I liked about the endings of stuff like Deus Ex (the first, and human revolution) as well as even ME3 is that I don't see the consequences of my choice (Extra Credits had a recent analysis of choices vs consequences).

By not seeing the consequences, for instance, people can debate and discuss the pros and cons of whether or not JC Denton's decision to merge with Helios was the best idea, or if granting the Illuminati power was best for the world going forward.  Or maybe, we just needed a reset like Tong suggested.  I know I have MY thoughts about it.  But if they went into the consequences of each of those actions, then it's less of a choice.  Imagine if picking Tong's city-state idea had an epilogue of how humanity simply returned to the same state that it was at when Denton pulled the switch?  Arguably, now, it's seen as a "meaningless choice" because it doesn't make any difference.  Especially if, for example, Denton merging with Helios results in a new Golden Age utopia for humanity.

 

All the interesting discourse over the choice is made irrelevant, and it becomes pretty clear which is the "right" choice.

 

 

Some games can make this work better.  I loved the endings of Vampire: Bloodlines.  Likely because there's such a smaller scale adventure so the idea of "winning" is much less impactful on the state of the game setting.  But when you side with the Kuei Jin, I simply go "bravo game" and it's a masterful ending.  But still, it's seen as a "losing" ending.  I think it's reinforced because you declare your allegiance a fair ways before the epilogue of the game.

[Wulfram]

It's like the Mages and the Templars.  There's plenty of people that fully believe siding with one or the other is the right course of action.  That people argue so much about it is, in my eye, a fascinating response and indicative of the fact that we likely made an interesting and complicated situation.

 

I don't agree.  Confusing, inconsistent or plain non-existant details and contrived negatives for the more sympathetic side adds up to plenty of controversy, but I don't think it makes a particularly interesting situation.

[EmperorSahlertz]

And what's wrong with feeling accomplished for achieving a happy ending? I don't see why people who like that kind of ending should have it stripped away and replaced with different shades of depressing outcomes just so others can argue that there isn't a 'right' ending, especially since no matter how bleak the endings get people will always argue one is better than the others. 

 

So it is stripping away the joy for some to address a problem that won't be fixed by its removal. 

The problem is that the presence of an ultimately happy ending, invalidates all the other endings in the eyes of the players.

[javeart]

Yes, actually. Some think destroying the Collector Base is optimal. Others think keeping the Collector Base is optimal. 

 

That's the kind of RP choice that will always be argued about and that I like. Getting everyone alive is a matter of ability, almost technical I'd say, so it's ok for me if doing that right gets a reward. It's like combat, let's say a mission where you get best the outome if you do it in less than 10 min and a not so good outcome if you do it in more than 10 min. That's fine. That's like combat, something that you learn to do better. But can you learn to roleplay better? Doesn't it feel very wrong if they game somehow tells you that you're roleplaying wrong?

[TheodoricFriede]

".... Oh and you've let an ancient dark entity of untold power live.... Surely that isn't gonna come back to haunt anyone!"

 

Yes, you can make an ending that turns out optimal results for your liking. You cannot make a happy ending.

There is nothing to indicate that the old god baby is/will be evil. Merely that it has the soul of an Old God. Soul's are not intentions, or memories.

 

You can make a happy ending. Very very easily.

[Allan Schumacher]

Um...yeah it does?

 

You can sure as hell make a happy ending if you try hard enough.

 

"Survived the blight. Alister is great king. Zevran lives. Sten respects you. Shale takes a mortal form. Connor survives. Dagna is useful at the circle. etc."

 

All of these are aspects of the happy ending you can create for yourself.

 

Except that it requires you to have done the Dark Ritual.  Which is a huge unknown, and it's the debating point of the game.  I think that the US is seen by enough people to be the "happy ending" that I think it's something we did right with DAO's ending.  There isn't a clear consensus over which ending is considered the best/ideal outcome.

[javeart]

Um...yeah it does?

 

You can sure as hell make a happy ending if you try hard enough.

 

"Survived the blight. Alister is great king. Zevran lives. Sten respects you. Shale takes a mortal form. Connor survives. Dagna is useful at the circle. etc."

 

All of these are aspects of the happy ending you can create for yourself.

 

That's all very subjective. Alistair dooesn't want to be king, you may not trust Morrigan, etc. If that choices make the ending happy for you, that's great, but it's not the samee that getting everyone alive in the SM

[Wulfram]

Except that it requires you to have done the Dark Ritual.  Which is a huge unknown, and it's the debating point of the game.  I think that the US is seen by enough people to be the "happy ending" that I think it's something we did right with DAO's ending.  There isn't a clear consensus over which ending is considered the best/ideal outcome.

 

But there probably will be when the Dark Ritual plot is resolved

[TheodoricFriede]

Except that it requires you to have done the Dark Ritual.  Which is a huge unknown, and it's the debating point of the game.  I think that the US is seen by enough people to be the "happy ending" that I think it's something we did right with DAO's ending.  There isn't a clear consensus over which ending is considered the best/ideal outcome.

 

There is nothing to indicate that the old god baby is/will be evil. Merely that it has the soul of an Old God. Soul's are not intentions, or memories.

 

You can make a happy ending. Very very easily.

[javeart]

But there probably will be when the Dark Ritual plot is resolved

 

One can hope that there wil be not... maybe both choices have good and bad consequences, I hope so

[Allan Schumacher]

I don't agree.  Confusing, inconsistent or plain non-existant details and contrived negatives for the more sympathetic side adds up to plenty of controversy, but I don't think it makes a particularly interesting situation.

 

I'm curious, what are the "contrived" negatives?

[EmperorSahlertz]

There is nothing to indicate that the old god baby is/will be evil. Merely that it has the soul of an Old God. Soul's are not intentions, or memories.

 

You can make a happy ending. Very very easily.

Other than the fact that it just recently attempted to extinguish all human life. You may be willing to chalk that up to it just being infected with a disease. I am not.

[TheodoricFriede]

That's all very subjective. Alistair dooesn't want to be king, you may not trust Morrigan, etc. If that choices make the ending happy for you, that's great, but it's not the samee that getting everyone alive in the SM

He does if you harden him. I trust Morrigan enough.

 

No, its not the same as the suicide mission. Because the suicide mission is a multiple choice test.

 

Dragon Age: Origins, however, gives you enough options and outcomes to create an ending that can be considered "happy".

 

Why is that an issue? Why do people have a problem with that? Must everything be gray, ambiguous, full of sacrifice, and ultimately hopeless?

[Allan Schumacher]

There is nothing to indicate that the old god baby is/will be evil. Merely that it has the soul of an Old God. Soul's are not intentions, or memories.

 

You can make a happy ending. Very very easily.

 

Then I'd say you made the choice irresponsibly.  I guess we'll find out though, won't we?

 

But it's a personal perspective of yours, and one that I (and many others) don't agree with.  It's a complete unknown... there's no indication if it will NOT be evil either.

[TheodoricFriede]

Other than the fact that it just recently attempted to extinguish all human life. You may be willing to chalk that up to it just being infected with a disease. I am not.

Well. It was infected with the Blight.

 

Further, Souls are not intentions.

[javeart]

He does if you harden him. I trust Morrigan enough.

 

No, its not the same as the suicide mission. Because the suicide mission is a multiple choice test.

 

Dragon Age: Origins, however, gives you enough options and outcomes to create an ending that can be considered "happy".

 

Why is that an issue? Why do people have a problem with that? Must everything be gray, ambiguous, full of sacrifice, and ultimately hopeless?

 

I don't have a problem with DAO endings at all, I love them, though for different reasons. What I don't want to see is a Connor situation in a bigger scale. I don't want a particular type of character getting everything right, while other types of characters get more troubles.

 

Edir: just to be clear, I don't even have a problem with all endings being happy. What matters to me is that differences are based on RP decisions and that there is not one clearly superior outcome

[Allan Schumacher]

But there probably will be when the Dark Ritual plot is resolved

 

Most likely yes, it will add fuel to the discussion.  And depending on how it's resolved people will retroactively apply it to the ending of DAO.

Given it's a different game and 5 years after the fact, however, I consider it a timeline that is acceptable enough.

[TheodoricFriede]

Then I'd say you made the choice irresponsibly.  I guess we'll find out though, won't we?

 

But it's a personal perspective of yours, and one that I (and many others) don't agree with.  It's a complete unknown... there's no indication if it will NOT be evil either.

I made in irresponsible choice for...not agreeing with you?

 

You already "found out" Alan. I dont have that luxury.

[nightcobra]

I'm curious, what are the "contrived" negatives?

 

well if i'm honest, i know in DA2 you wanted to show the worst of both sides but making almost every mage and templar we encountered (apart from the reasonable mages and templars that were conveniently killed off by insane mages/templars) were batshit insane. i though it was a bit hammered on my head while i played. "don't trust mages/templars, they'll go insane. If you do find reasonable mages/templars they will die at the hands of the insane ones"

 

my male mage hawke at the end was pratically feeling like varric "i don't care, i just want to be out of this insane maker forsaken place"

[Hanako Ikezawa]

I feel Rocket Raccoon sums up my response to a lot of these posts:

 

[Allan Schumacher]

I made in irresponsible choice for...not agreeing with you?

 

You already "found out" Alan. I dont have that luxury.

 

I'm speaking within the context of DAO's ending.

 

It's fine that you feel that there's no risk involved.... but it's a position based on the knowledge that DAO provides that I disagree with.  I don't actually know how the Old God Baby plot resolves in DAI, so I haven't actually "found out."

 

EDIT: Spoken as someone that did the Dark Ritual too.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 03 août 2014 - 10:55 .

[TheodoricFriede]

I don't have a problem with DAO endings at all, I love them, though for different reasons. What I don't want to see is a Connor situation in a bigger scale. I don't want a particular type of character getting everything right, while other types of characters get more troubles.

 

Edir: just to be clear, I don't even have a problem with all endings being happy. What matters to me is that differences are based on RP decisions and that there is not one clearly superior outcome

Fair enough.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Well. It was infected with the Blight.

 

Further, Souls are not intentions.

It was indeed. What makes you think that was its motivating factor?

 

And some people would argue that it is EXACTLY what souls are.

[Allan Schumacher]

well if i'm honest, i know in DA2 you wanted to show the worst of both sides but making almost every mage and templar we encountered (apart from the reasonable mages and templars that were conveniently killed off by insane mages/templars) were batshit insane. i though it was a bit hammered on my head while i played. "don't trust mages/templars, they'll go insane. If you do find reasonable mages/templars they will die at the hands of the insane ones"

 

Wulfram made reference to a sympathetic side.  While I won't begrudge you from feeling that DA2 had issues with the Mage-Templar war and how it was depicted, your still provide the perspective of it being relatively equivalent/debatable.  Unless I'm misunderstanding something.

[Allan Schumacher]

I feel Rocket Raccoon sums up my response to a lot of these posts:

 

Couldn't I use a similar response to posts of people that I disagree with?