41 réponses à ce sujet

[dekarserverbot]

to tell the truth it's not the character that must be a hero... I have played enjoyable RPG games with underdogs (Earthbound 2) Reclutant heroes (the innkeeper)  and even average joes.

 

But they tried to hard on Hawke, instead of delivering an underdog we got a character who was more useless than an NPC. plus being surrounded by whinny characters that mimics the standards of Soul Calibur V and Final Fantasy XIII is not cool.

 

Once again, i don't hate hawke for being an average joe character... I HATE HIM BECAUSE HE WAS USELESS AND SURROUNDED BY PESTS! Sometimes i think i'm going to hard on DA2, because it has some of the most hatefull cast and simpsonized character derrailment (you know, see the first seasons of the simpsons and the characters are charming... see one of the new and you hate every citizen in springfield except Nelson and Moe).

 

Anders was totally ruined here, whoever wrote his dialogues should had their hands burned. Merril was turned into a clone of Pyrra from SCV (god i hated that character) the only reason I decided Hawke to romance her was because they both lost their families (maybe also the fact that Isabela had my sister's appearence, ass and dress style... total turn off). Before playing DA2 i hated Oghren in Awakenings... but AFTER PLAYING DA2 I liked the character's derailment of Oghren, it's not coincidence:

 

Oghren suffers of true love case, also is brokenhearthed. Felsi was the negation phase, it had consecuences with a child but Oghren's heart belongs only to Branka, the derailment and exageration was justified... but Anders:

 

 

so you turn a cynical chaotic neutral flamboyant cassanova with iron will and ubber optimism into a whiny sociopath bisexual emoguy with absolutely no empathy that is pulling my leg, the real reason i want to destroy every DA2 copy in the world is THAT. the character retconing and derailment was unforgivable... Flemmeth is no longer human,  now is a qunnari, Merrill is no longer and ambiguously mature character, now is a little irresponsible spoiled girl, Isabela is no longer the busty red haired bandit, now is a not so busty with an incredible booty pirate, and I stopped hating Cullen, THAT'S NOT GOOD BTW!  good thing no other characters returned... i can't imagine what crimes could be done:

 

"What if" these characters were in DA2 with the shitty script and ridicoulus retcons involved:

 

Sten: open minded character that has a fixation for little humans, be either male or female... stupid Hawke. ALSO DON'T SELL ASALA (even if it's the worst 2H sword in all the game) or you will have a hard time like with Aveline's shield crying.

Shale: retconed to be like a mixture of "anders" and Isabella, instead of a lovable gollem we could have a busty flat butted gold statue with five toes, sculpted slave underwear and collar plus crystals impaled in all her body  ala red lyrium with ass attitude, absolutely no charisma and more whinny than  usual (but this time is not "charming whining" but NEFAROIUS ONE)

Lloyd: A responsible companion with Leeroy Jerkins courage that ends marrying Varric with absolutely "no say" schedulte to avoid that awfull event... neither an explanation. Whatever he will get killed during act 3 by trying to save people from anders... yes it doesn't makes sense, but DA2 is about not making sense, just aiming to enrage the audience.

Loghain: enveloped in orlesians drapes, oh yes also has an orlesian mask... he survived NO MATTER WHAT YOU DID IN DAO

Arl Rendon Howe: a thrustworty lovable fellow that you can no longer hate...

 

So, if the script was ACTUALLY GOOD instead of a turd nightmare I would had love DA2... but sorry DA2 is as good as story mode in SCV or even worse... wonder if BW got the inspiration to deliver a crap doing all things they promise never do from Namco

 

 

What do you mean "we"? I hate stories about saving the world from evil monsters and love DA2's story.

 

 

Go read trashy novels, leave this place for the sake of good

[SmilesJA]

 

Go read trashy novels, leave this place for the sake of good

 

Who are you to judge? If he or she likes DA2's story over DAO than it's their right. That person is your fellow Dragon Age fan and if you can't handle differing opinions, then YOU should leave this place for the sake of good.

[StElmo]

 You know the one were we have a great evil and we gather allies to help us defeat it. Also when they did a different one in DA2 we hated it. So what is it so attractive at this formula?

 

I didn't hate it. DA2 is my favorite BioWare story. I love it when storytellers change it up like they did in DA2

[Fast Jimmy]

The structure you are talking about really has little to do with "gather allies to defeat the Big Bad" as it does about proper story progression.

The player is given a goal starting out - stop the Blight. An insurmountable task, given your starting point (but thats part of the progression). The player is also given three (three is just a psychologically satisfying number) tasks to complete to bring this goal closer to realization - each one a self-contained story, but all heading towards a singular conclusion. The player achieves that goal, with characters and plot twists along the way.

Contrast that with DA2. You are given no task, no purpose and the only way to differentiate between the main quests that are "important" to the plot and the random side quests sprinkled throughout the game are the indicators in the quest journal. Its not a more personal story - it is a random string of events that happen to occur to one person. I understand that may have been the point - Varric is explaining to Cassandra why Hawke can't fix everything, despite the legend built up around the events at Kirkwall - but it still makes for a poor narrative.

Any aspiration or goal you could assign to Hawke is quite likely to get dashed along the rocks for no real reason other than Hawke's own ineptitude. The story gives very little to latch onto for assigning purpose, but then makes any chance of achieving said purpose impossible due to the shortcomings of your own character.

Want to keep your family safe and together as the driver for your Hawke? Too bad - you won't say anything when your mom starts receiving flowers that match identically to the MO of a serial killer you've been pursuing for years. Want to make your goal to achieve enough power and wealth to rise above the pettiness in Kirkwall? Too bad - you still run at the beck and call of every NPC who wants to boss you around. Want to be the one voice of order and reason in a city going progressively more insane each year? Too bad - you are forced to take one side or the other and then kill both Orsino and Meredith in the end because Boss Fights.

The list goes on - the game gives no direction, no goal and no purpose. And if the player ever tries to assign one on their own, the story directly counteracts it. Thats why it is a less well-received story: it completely neuters player agency. It has nothing to do with being an "every man's story" and is instead a story explaining why Hawke is not an important character.

[SomeoneStoleMyName]

 You know the one were we have a great evil and we gather allies to help us defeat it. Also when they did a different one in DA2 we hated it. So what is it so attractive at this formula?

Because it allows the player to live out his/her power fantasies. To give the player the illusion of being someone important, loved and respected. 

It really is the simplest selling-strategy possible regarding appeal to general psychology. 

[Nerevar-as]

I didn't hate it. DA2 is my favorite BioWare story. I love it when storytellers change it up like they did in DA2

In order to love or hate a story, there must be one to start with, and in DAII there wasn´t. It works great as a deconstruction of the big figure who changes everything around him/her, as Cass sees Hawke as one, but playing the game and seeing how nothing s/he did amounted to much, it´s hard to see how she got that idea to begin with. So I doubt the deconstruction part was the idea the writers had in mind.

[JCFR]

In order to love or hate a story, there must be one to start with, and in DAII there wasn´t. It works great as a deconstruction of the big figure who changes everything around him/her, as Cass sees Hawke as one, but playing the game and seeing how nothing s/he did amounted to much, it´s hard to see how she got that idea to begin with. So I doubt the deconstruction part was the idea the writers had in mind.

 

And that in itself was - for me - rather likeable about Hawke. He wasn't this kind of "i'm gonna save the world" or "i'm gonna dominate the world" Hero. He was just someone who got into something way over his head and tried to survive and protect his family while also follwing his own moral compass.

The problem with the story was, that it lacked impact - especially the choices. Kirkwall did not change according to your decisions in this ten-year-storyline.

And presenting the plot as some kind of flashbacks was - in my opnion - really interesting and innovative. But the fact, that the two endings were rather similar was a big lackluster.

 

But overall the story of DA2 is not bad. It's not presented in the best ways and lacks impact but it's not as bad as you make it sound.

[Demiga]

IDK - I like some of the games that leave the generic story like DA2 - but I also love the standard - hero vs the world eating monster - It makes for great storytelling and is usually epic - and although the main theme is the same, it allows for diversity within the overall arch - how many stories have been created out there with the same overall theme but completely different in how it unravels...idk - i love the story for this series and cant wait to see how it ends

[Fast Jimmy]

I don't view it as a story in the traditional sense. It's just a character study or portrait, if you will. Where we get to play the character in question. Lots of novels and films are done this way as well. With no clear plot points or "big bads".

But that is part of the problem - a video game is not a book or a movie. It is not a passive medium, where the audience is merely a watcher. Video games tie the player to the character, to the story, in a much more "real" way, especially games that involve choice and character definition/control.

Reservoir Dogs is a movie about a simple plan that all falls apart and turns tragic for everyone involved. It is an intense story where the viewer tries to piece together the mystery and watches as characters turn on themselves and help hasten their own road to ruin.

Yet we never feel we are Mr. Pink, secretly hiding the diamond stash location, nor are Mr. Blonde, choosing to torture the cop. The information and events fold out for the viewer to absorb, but never insert or feel as if anything is being done by or to them.

Contrast that with video games, where we can take control of an 8-bit frog and when we get hit by a moving rectangle, we say "that car just killed me!" Even at the most rudimentary levels of plot or immersion, the player attaches, identifies and participates with the events happening.

Does that mean every video game story needs to be "hero saves the day?" Of course not. But it does mean that video game writers need to be aware that total, unmitigated failure in nearly anything the main character tries to do is exceptionally demoralizing. To find that most of the forced failure also ties back to things the game forced the player to do (ignore the lilies sent to your mom, grab the clearly evil looking statue and then let the greedy opportunist walk right out the room with it, not noticing that your terrorist, demon possesed friend is behaving even more terrorist-y than normal, being forced to agree that your role as the Champion forces you to choose sides and not just walk away, or try and keep peace amongst the panicky populace or not do anything until a proper Rite of Annulment was given... or any other number of silly things the plot demanded) runs a high risk of disenfranchising the player, divorcing them from the main character and ultimately feel that their time and efforts have been completely wasted.

People shouldnt ever finish your game thinking "well, that was a waste of time that I wish I hadn't even done." Yet thats exactly how many people felt after playing DA2 (and ME3, for that matter, another example of a failed alternative narrative).

[SmilesJA]

In order to love or hate a story, there must be one to start with, and in DAII there wasn´t. It works great as a deconstruction of the big figure who changes everything around him/her, as Cass sees Hawke as one, but playing the game and seeing how nothing s/he did amounted to much, it´s hard to see how she got that idea to begin with. So I doubt the deconstruction part was the idea the writers had in mind.

 

Then it is a story about a man who rose to a champion, but It wasn't the typical way portrayed in Bioware games.

[Solid_Altair]

LOL... SCV is one of favorite games. But I can't disagree about the story. Although, for a fight game it ain't bad. However, having a Pyrrha-esque character in a more serious story in action game would be terrible, I suppose. Didn't play the previous DAs.

[Fast Jimmy]

Then it is a story about a man who rose to a champion, but It wasn't the typical way portrayed in Bioware games.

Neither was Shephard? I've never seen a champion rise up by finding a broken alien telepathic PSA.

Neither was Revan? I've never seen a champion rise up finding out they are an amnesiatic sith lord.

Neither was the Warden? I've never seen a champion rise up through being infected by a mirror, or exiled into the deep underground for murder, or by being nearly raped on their wedding night.

If you look at the minutia details, sure, Hawke is not the typical hero. If you look at the reality, Hawke was just as boring of a hero as any other. Found to be special by a powerful NPC (Flemeth), shows up to a city and instantly has people clamoring over their skills (Act 1), recruited as the only hope to bring peace because "reasons" (Act 2) and looked at to make a world changing decision through no real logic or reasoning (Act 3).

There's a lot of forced plot helplessness, for sure. But that doesn't make Hawke an "everyman," just simply a hero who stinks at the job they are given.

[SmilesJA]

Neither was Shephard? I've never seen a champion rise up by finding a broken alien telepathic PSA.

Neither was Revan? I've never seen a champion rise up finding out they are an amnesiatic sith lord.

Neither was the Warden? I've never seen a champion rise up through being infected by a mirror, or exiled into the deep underground for murder, or by being nearly raped on their wedding night.

If you look at the minutia details, sure, Hawke is not the typical hero. If you look at the reality, Hawke was just as boring of a hero as any other. Found to be special by a powerful NPC (Flemeth), shows up to a city and instantly has people clamoring over their skills (Act 1), recruited as the only hope to bring peace because "reasons" (Act 2) and looked at to make a world changing decision through no real logic or reasoning (Act 3).

There's a lot of forced plot helplessness, for sure. But that doesn't make Hawke an "everyman," just simply a hero who stinks at the job they are given.

 

In Act 1 to bring "peace" back then he was just doing jobs to get money for the deep roads and also is because of the reputation he developed from his smuggling/merc work. Act 2 the reason he was called upon was because Hawke was the only one the Arishok would even listen to. In Act 3 It was because he was trying to clean the mess that the Mages and Templars were causing. Sure It was forced in some places, but given the circumstances, especially in Act 3 Hawke did what he could to stop things from getting worse.