29 réponses à ce sujet

[Malfrun]

The choice to allow both Connor and Isolde to live? it just doesn't seem like them to have a "luvvy duvvy" happy ending, there's is really no negative consequences.

 

I was speaking with a friend. We thought maybe as it takes two days to get to the circle tower, when you get back you hear Jowan had tried to be a hero and gone after Connor but failed and was killed. Not exactly negative if you hated Jowan but it would give the Mage Warden something to think about as they are probably the most likely to choose that choice. Just an example of what they could have done.

 

There Is a video on youtube (https://www[dot]youtube[dot]com/watch?v=zMSJDxM8YT4) that is of unused dialogue from Mass Effect(spoilers btw), of a choice that allows you save both Ashley and Kaiden and as you may know that isn't possible and again would have been a, for want of another phrase, "luvvy duvvy" choice.

[Arisugawa]

I think it's appropriate.

 

A number of things have to happen in order to this occur, such as not siding with the Templars in Broken Circle.

 

Since so many of the other quests end in choices that are either unfavorable or have no real satisfactory end: Dwarven Noble origin, Mage origin, the Morrigan/Dark Ritual question, losing Shale if you support Branka, losing Alistair if you grant Loghain mercy, someone dying in the end if you don't grant Loghain mercy, etc, I'm happy that certain quests like Arl of Redcliffe or Nature of the Beast can actually have a satisfactory resolution.

[Icy Magebane]

There's no way that the demon should have remained docile for several days while the party traveled to the Circle Tower and back.  Even worse, if they hadn't even done Broken Circle and had to waste even more time there...  I doubt that anyone at Bioware regrets the way this quest was designed, but I wish this options had been more realistic... and a whole lot darker considering the Warden left Bann Tegan, Ser Perth, and Jowan to watch over the castle... w/e... that was years ago so I'm not going to keep ranting about it.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

There's no way that the demon should have remained docile for several days while the party traveled to the Circle Tower and back.  Even worse, if they hadn't even done Broken Circle and had to waste even more time there...  I doubt that anyone at Bioware regrets the way this quest was designed, but I wish this options had been more realistic... and a whole lot darker considering the Warden left Bann Tegan, Ser Perth, and Jowan to watch over the castle... w/e... that was years ago so I'm not going to keep ranting about it.

Even then the worst of it could have been avoided had party members been left behind, if not because they keep the demon at bay then because there are competent fighters to cover a retreat. (Though this could very well have meant injury or death for those companions.) Some people headcanon that they did so but in an objective sense I do not believe the Warden actually did this given that no restrictions are placed on who you may switch to in-game.

[Icy Magebane]

Even then the worst of it could have been avoided had party members been left behind, which some people headcanon that they did but which I believe was not actually done given that no restrictions are placed on who you may switch to in-game.

A bit more attention to detail would have made this option palatable to me.  If we were forced to leave people behind, they could have had a scene similar to the one at the Denerim gates where you must battle demons in Redcliffe Castle using the party members you left behind as guards... and if you didn't recruit anyone yet?  Well, too bad.  You can control Jowan, Ser Perth, and Teagan as temporary party members, but at least one of your team (not Dog) must stay behind, even if it leaves you short handed....

 

Meh... I said I wouldn't rant... >.>

[enson8502]

In Dragon Age Origins or in DA 2, I never really got an happy ending for my warden or my Hawke. And it's rare someone else in the games got his or her happy ending. So, I'm happy at least one family got something good in the end, if Connor and Isolde are both alive. The chance to get killed in Ferelden is high enough, thanks there is people to survive in this country and can ben happy in the end!

[Hazegurl]

There's no way that the demon should have remained docile for several days while the party traveled to the Circle Tower and back.  Even worse, if they hadn't even done Broken Circle and had to waste even more time there...  I doubt that anyone at Bioware regrets the way this quest was designed, but I wish this options had been more realistic... and a whole lot darker considering the Warden left Bann Tegan, Ser Perth, and Jowan to watch over the castle... w/e... that was years ago so I'm not going to keep ranting about it.

 

I agree, I wish that quest had a hidden time limit. If you do it before the Broken Circle quest, the demon rampages the castle and kills everyone (Mother and Teagan) and escapes. The PC has to revive Eamon and break the bad news. If you  already did Broken Circle and choose to leave the castle to travel to the tower he only kills Teagan or his mother by the time you return for the ritual. But oh well.
 

[Malfrun]

I do understand and yes some options should be happy in such a bleak world. But why this one? everyone talks like you have two very difficult choices to make and then you can come up with the third and then they go on about this choice that has a very slim chance of working but then just goes on without a hitch it just seems misplaced.

 

*sigh* maybe its me just finding both isolde and connor insufferable and a world where they both survive sounds abhorent.

[Icy Magebane]

I do understand and yes some options should be happy in such a bleak world. But why this one? everyone talks like you have two very difficult choices to make and then you can come up with the third and then they go on about this choice that has a very slim chance of working but then just goes on without a hitch it just seems misplaced.

 

*sigh* maybe its me just finding both isolde and connor insufferable and a world where they both survive sounds abhorent.

Oh, well I don't have a grudge against either of the characters, I just think that it makes no sense for the demon to sit around twiddling its thumbs while the Warden and their party leave town for a couple of days or more... it's a very poorly implemented option that doesn't follow logic and thus the entire situation loses any sense of drama or urgency. 

 

Personally I just refuse to metagame and assume something will go wrong if we leave, so either Connor or Isolde dies... I don't even consider the Circle option because it makes no sense unless you already know how it turns out.

[congokong]

I'm not a fan of those "paragon = win" scenarios but if you've played Mass Effect you'd know it's not unusual. My canon stories for both DA and Mass Effect involve some or many "renegade" choices because:

1. In real life it's often the outcome someone without meta-gaming knowledge would probably take.

2. A good story has bad things happen.

 

My canon warden for example did Jowan's ritual. Her being a mage made it much more personal and that cinematic is awesome. It's also a realistic compromise. In real life there's no way I'd leave that zombie ridden village without some resolution but ...might... be swayed to take a risk by trying to save Connor. It could go wrong though by forcing 3 people to die (the Warden, Isolde, and Connor) instead of one if the pc fails but it's a risk many would take. That scenario makes for the best story IMO.

[Mykel54]

The circle mage option was terrible, but then so was the Nature of the Beast curse lifting

 

Even marrying Alistair to Anora was a bit forced (why in hell would he agree to such a thing if he could get the throne on his own?) as if it was a choice merely for Alistair, without the player forcing him then he would never marry her, as he would rather remain a warden (unhardened) / be sole king (hardened).

 

In my playthroughs i avoid all these choices, i only make them sometimes for giggles. I find they do not fit the DA setting which is sort of grim, with the darkspawn, the blood magic, the necessary sacrifices of the wardens, the bigotry for elves, etc. It just feels out of place to have happy endings like that. Though in Alistair case, he is quite pissed for you forcing him to marry Anora, so i get that is more realistic.

[Jaison1986]

I'm not a fan of those "paragon = win" scenarios but if you've played Mass Effect you'd know it's not unusual. My canon stories for both DA and Mass Effect involve some or many "renegade" choices because:

1. In real life it's often the outcome someone without meta-gaming knowledge would probably take.

2. A good story has bad things happen.

 

My canon warden for example did Jowan's ritual. Her being a mage made it much more personal and that cinematic is awesome. It's also a realistic compromise. In real life there's no way I'd leave that zombie ridden village without some resolution but ...might... be swayed to take a risk by trying to save Connor. It could go wrong though by forcing 3 people to die (the Warden, Isolde, and Connor) instead of one if the pc fails but it's a risk many would take. That scenario makes for the best story IMO.

 

One thing I would argue is that in Mass effect, when you make an paragon option, it usually makes you feel heroic, with Shepard fighting the bad guys and saving the innocent, so it gives that "feel good" kind of feeling. Of course, even thought my Shepard was paragon, he was no wimp, he executed in cold blood his old gang member from earth when he tried to blackmail him. He shoved the merc out of the window when he started acting smug, he beated the ***** out of the criminal guy during Thane's loyalty. 

 

The difference in Dragon age is that the game push you really hard to be 100% paragon all of the time, otherwise you are an horrible person. Like Alistair giving you an angry rant if you don't act like an saint during the Connor choice, Wynne leaving you because of some ashes, Morrigan leaving you if you don't do exactly what she wants. And the worst of it is that the paragon path usually lead to you helping people that deep down are an bunch annoying jerks that are not really worth the trouble. What exactly is the logic of me being nice and helpful to an bunch of irritable people that don't really deserve my help? I never felt like that when I played Mass effect.

[AlanC9]

That's actually a problem with ME. You might as well always be the big damn hero, since it aleays works out fine.

As for the topic, didn't Gaider say on his blog that he thought the Redcliffe resolution was a mistake? IIRC he also says that ME3's peace at Rannoch was a mistake too.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

As for the topic, didn't Gaider say on his blog that he thought the Redcliffe resolution was a mistake? IIRC he also says that ME3's peace at Rannoch was a mistake too.

I'd thought I'd remembered something like that first one, but I wasn't sure enough to put it down. (I have put down things I wasn't sure of while noting them as such before, which should tell you how faintly I remember this.) As for Rannoch, I don't really remember.

 

That said, I don't view Rannoch as as egregious as Redcliffe; the Geth explicitly want to stop killing quarians, and Shepherd has had to do the most respectable thing in all cases across three games so that the quarians would listen when he said they shouldn't make the geth do what they'll otherwise do. You might argue that it's cheap, and you might be right, but Redcliffe? Where the demon does not attack for the matter of several days that you're absent with no known countermeasures left to defend Redcliffe in your place? That's cheaper.

[congokong]

One thing I would argue is that in Mass effect, when you make an paragon option, it usually makes you feel heroic, with Shepard fighting the bad guys and saving the innocent, so it gives that "feel good" kind of feeling. Of course, even thought my Shepard was paragon, he was no wimp, he executed in cold blood his old gang member from earth when he tried to blackmail him. He shoved the merc out of the window when he started acting smug, he beated the ***** out of the criminal guy during Thane's loyalty. 

 

The difference in Dragon age is that the game push you really hard to be 100% paragon all of the time, otherwise you are an horrible person. Like Alistair giving you an angry rant if you don't act like an saint during the Connor choice, Wynne leaving you because of some ashes, Morrigan leaving you if you don't do exactly what she wants. And the worst of it is that the paragon path usually lead to you helping people that deep down are an bunch annoying jerks that are not really worth the trouble. What exactly is the logic of me being nice and helpful to an bunch of irritable people that don't really deserve my help? I never felt like that when I played Mass effect.

DA:O punishes you for being "renegade" more in things like your companions turning on you. On my first blind playthrough I went into it with an evil mindset and had Shale, Leliana, and Wynne turn on me. There is also the risk of companions leaving and/or losing romance/dialogue with them because you're a jerk. That's why I liked DA2's rivalry system. You could be the biggest douche but not lose any content with companions.

 

As for ME, I enjoyed being paragon by looking at those playthroughs with a completely different mindset; basically by treating Shepard as something from a fairytale/one-dimensional Ms. "Perfect-and-Untouchable where everything works out" protagonist story while renegade Shepards are for more mature audiences who want realism. Paragon Shepard was like James Bond while renegade Shepard was like Jack Bauer.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

 I knew, I just knew before the option even presented itself that there would be some way to save Isolde and Connor both.

 

And when it did I did not like it. You leave the abomination to its devices while you go fetch help. That's crazy. I would respect the option a whole hell of a lot more if the Warden returned to see another dire situation with the demon running amok. Better yet if NPCs confronted the Warden, blaming him/her for the damage done just to do Isolde's bidding.

 

I did like Rannoch in ME3, however. It felt reasonably well set-up by the events that preceded it.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

One thing I would argue is that in Mass effect, when you make an paragon option, it usually makes you feel heroic, with Shepard fighting the bad guys and saving the innocent, so it gives that "feel good" kind of feeling. Of course, even thought my Shepard was paragon, he was no wimp, he executed in cold blood his old gang member from earth when he tried to blackmail him. He shoved the merc out of the window when he started acting smug, he beated the ***** out of the criminal guy during Thane's loyalty. 

 

The difference in Dragon age is that the game push you really hard to be 100% paragon all of the time, otherwise you are an horrible person. Like Alistair giving you an angry rant if you don't act like an saint during the Connor choice, Wynne leaving you because of some ashes, Morrigan leaving you if you don't do exactly what she wants. And the worst of it is that the paragon path usually lead to you helping people that deep down are an bunch annoying jerks that are not really worth the trouble. What exactly is the logic of me being nice and helpful to an bunch of irritable people that don't really deserve my help? I never felt like that when I played Mass effect.

Perhaps I should note that it's the characters you're so annoyed by pushing you to do this, not the game as a whole. You'll get chewed out for what you're doing, which is realistic, but you don't watch the game outright tell you that you've done something wrong in the form of your character's portrait sprouting red horns and picking up a pitchfork as you do worse and worse things.

[eyezonlyii]

Perhaps I should note that it's the characters you're so annoyed by pushing you to do this, not the game as a whole. You'll get chewed out for what you're doing, which is realistic, but you don't watch the game outright tell you that you've done something wrong in the form of your character's portrait sprouting red horns and picking up a pitchfork as you do worse and worse things.

You mean like Fable. LOL

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

You mean like Fable. LOL

That's the only one that took it as far as I describe, but Fallout had a few arbitrary moral judgements too. I mean, it's not like the Raiders who just tried to kill you are using that meat, and it's just going to rot and go to waste...

[Jaison1986]

That's the only one that took it as far as I describe, but Fallout had a few arbitrary moral judgements too. I mean, it's not like the Raiders who just tried to kill you are using that meat, and it's just going to rot and go to waste...

 

Well... so long as you don't eat anyone that doesn't deserve it, I wouldn't judge (I did killed the canibal comunity though). Fallout 3 had some annoying moral compass. Like I would get an bad reputation for killing the ghouls that want to enter Tempenny tower, even though those ghouls are in fact an bunch of murderers. Especially when Three dog called me an "scumbag" for killing them. I just had enough of that judgmental guy.

 

As for your argument, I suppose it's part true. I mean, the characters are indeed the ones chastising me for doing something that is usually seen as wrong, but it does feel like it's the game way of saying "you ***** it up buddy".

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

As for your argument, I suppose it's part true. I mean, the characters are indeed the ones chastising me for doing something that is usually seen as wrong, but it does feel like it's the game way of saying "you ***** it up buddy".

If there's anything like that in the game, I believe it to be the epilogue slides. No matter what my companions say, I always feel like it's the game expounding on the results that vindicates or attacks me. Though since those have always been considered non-binding, I might soon have to replace that with the import differences in subsequent games.

[Lavaeolus]

Wanting this choice to be between the two =/= never want any happy choices. You still get the opportunity to ride in, save Redcliffe, stop the Blight, and be lauded a hero for years to come. Sometimes people are made to make tough choices. This does not mean, as you seem to jump to, every choice someone will make in the game has to be dark and meaningless.

 

The happy option in this case is clearly forced, and removes any incentive for doing the other options which are set up in a classic, fun dilemma. The fun in that dilemma is completely destroyed if my character is just randomly being a dick and letting everyone die.

[Mykel54]

Indeed, the DAO Warden does a lot of things that can be considered to have happy endings, like stopping the blight before it begins, saving redcliff, saving the elves from slavery, saving the mages in the tower, etc.

 

I for one prefer to play games that are somewhat realistic in their depictions: if there is a large battle i expect people to die, and not just unnamed soldiers, i expect named npcs to die as well. I don´t like a game when there are battles and nobody dies on those except the mooks, it reminds me of Wynne´s tale where the wardens saved the day and nobody died. I do not mind there being happy endings for the protagonist, but only as long as there is some cost involved.

 

You became queen of ferelden and married alistair, but you ruined the reputation of the Howes and Anora, so they hate your guts. That´s not happy ending for them. Anora and the Howes will them lead rebellions against you, rising up the banns and peasants who idolize farmer-Loghain, and they will be a thorn on your side for the rest of your reign. Your reign is not so happy as you expected.

 

Or if you rather, you became queen of ferelden and married alistair, then the queen had kids (the taint means nothing!) and went on to become a legendary ruler that led Ferelden into a golden age. Peace was made with Orlais, the elves got the same rights as others fereldans, and whatever other happy stuff you want to add.

 

I for one prefer the former scenario more interesting, because even though DA is a fantasy setting, the acts-consequences are grounded on reality.

[Malfrun]

 

And I'm not a fan of it. I'm personally not a fan of quests where it always ends with "You failed to save someone. No matter what, someone had to die." WE GET IT. Life sucks. Life isn't fair. Life doesn't always have a happy ending. Sometimes you do the best you can and things still go to hell. Sometimes you try your hardest and you still fail to save someone.

 

I believe in that but just going to the to the circle is the easiest option and you aren't trying your hardest. That's what i;m mainly annoyed about.