289 réponses à ce sujet

[TK514]

I agree that after Haven, Cory never feels like a threat.  I never felt like anyone was in real danger, or that there was any pressure to get something done.  I don't mind the happy ending, in fact I prefer them, but in this case it really didn't feel like it was ever in doubt.

 

There's no point after Haven where Cory decides we've caused him enough trouble and actually hits back.  It feels like our very first victory, claiming either the Mages or the Templars, actually won the war, and we just spend time playing World Janitor after that.

 

It doesn't help that if you were paying any attention at all to dialog, much less out of game marketing, you knew Haven was expendable.  So Cory hitting you there feels less like "Oh crap, now we're homeless and in trouble" and more like "Finally we're going to get our real base/castle!"

[Enrychan]

It's not about "tragic ending" versus "happy ending". The point is, to feel that you've earned your ending, whether happy or sad, your protagonist has to go through their danger zone, face risk and possibly loss. These are the basics of storytelling. I personally didn't feel any real danger from Corypheus past Haven, and the ending was very short and completely safe for my Inquisitor and her companions. That's why I felt I didn't "earn" my ending and "victory felt empty".

[phaonica]

As a famous author once said "The strength of the protagonist is measured by the threat of the antagonist". A pretty good line, really. In this game, though, the antagonist is very weak. He lets the protagonist go on about his business, and doesn't try to hinder or oppose him at all. There are no reactions or counter strikes from Cory, when we start killing his allies or mess up his plans.

 

This exactly.

 

There was at least one scene

Spoiler

during the Mage quest when you get sent to the future

where the threat of the Breach was immediate, tangible, and devastating. But after that, the conflict was all avoided and the threat was entirely diminished. It's a shame because when Corypheus first showed up on screen, I was thinking "Holy s**t, yes. Maybe we'll get some awesome revelations that will truely challenge my character's beliefs." But nope. Just kill dragons when they show up and you'll be fine.

[Moirnelithe]

The origins in DA:O made the main story personal, I do miss that in DA:I. I felt indifferent about killing the arch demon in DA:O, but I cared a lot about getting even with arl Howe. DA:I lacks personal investment, I feel just as indifferent about killing Corypheus as I did about the arch demon but this time there is no arl Howe to make up for that. It's one of the reasons why to me the inquisitor feels more like Biowares character and less my character.

[pablosplinter]

So...what the OP wants is the ME 3 ending. The same ending everyone exploded over 2 years ago. That same exact ending that people still complain about.


And that's what the OP is basically wanting.


kay. Gamers are wierd.

Seriously, that is what you understood of the op?

I agree that the story lacked a certain personal touch. I never really had a sense of doom or even danger, and it took some weight off of the game for me.

[Ieldra]

If there's another way, he obviously doesn't *need* to remove it. He tries, fails, and goes "oh well, that was too hard, but that's ok, I'll just have to try some other way to get into the Fade". He would have liked the anchor because it would have made things easier for him, but if he can't have it, no biggie. It's not personal at all. After Haven he doesn't give a **** about you until you show up at the well.

And that's perfectly ok. He's on his own business that will swallow the world if we don't prevent him. At that point, I don't think another personal angle is needed. What might have improved the story is showing him as a still growing menace in the background, while you could do nothing because you didn't know what was going on, perhaps by reports of distant victories. You would've been ignorant of his next goal until some war table operation uncovered it instead of giving it to you right after completing the previous mission. That would also be an incentive to go exploring, put some clues in distant maps etc..

 

I don't mind the way the story was going, but there is a noticeable lack of tension after Wicked Hearts and Wicked Minds/Here Lies the Abyss.  

[cjones91]

I agree,Cory was a underwhelming villain but tragedy for tragedy's sake is just as bad.

[phaonica]

The origins in DA:O made the main story personal, I do miss that in DA:I. I felt indifferent about killing the arch demon in DA:O, but I cared a lot about getting even with arl Howe. DA:I lacks personal investment, I feel just as indifferent about killing Corypheus as I did about the arch demon but this time there is no arl Howe to make up for that. It's one of the reasons why to me the inquisitor feels more like Biowares character and less my character.

 

I feel similarly about DAO. The archdemon was there, but it was a black-and-white evil monster that you never questioned that it needed to die. The more interesting conflicts in that game were the conflicts in Denerim, Orzammar, the Dalish forest, etc.

 

You say that "DAI lacks personal investment" and I agree 100%. The conflict in DAI challenges the survival of the world, but it never challenges the beliefs, integrity, or personal desires of the main character.

[phaonica]

I agree,Cory was a underwhelming villain but tragedy for tragedy's sake is just as bad.

 

In your opinion, what is the difference between tragedy for tragedy's sake and tragedy with a purpose?

 

Edit: I asked this question hastily without really knowing what I was asking. The difference is obviously that one has no evident purpose. Maybe what I mean to ask is something more like how does one tell the difference between the two?

[llandwynwyn]

It's very tragic if you romance Solas.

[cjones91]

Tragedy with a  purpose is something that happens with scenes like the Ultimate Sacrifice or

Spoiler

Morrigan becoming enternally bound to Flemeth and essentially finding out she was her pawn all along if the former drank from the Well of Sorrows and what happened with Solas

.

 

Tragedy for the sake of it is something like ME3's story and endings where you're forced to be guilt ridden and some characters die simply for shock value.Or the scene with Hawke's mother in DA2 where he/she would've and should've had the common sense to warn his/her mother that there was a serial killer who targets middle aged women running around Kirkwall.

 

I dislike hamfisted situations like that because they have less impact.

[Estelindis]

I felt this way, the first time I played the game.  I sought the support of the templars that time.  Now, replaying, I tried the mages, and I found that the resulting mission gave me quite a strong sense of tragedy and loss.  Given what my companions and at least one advisor suffered in a year, I took it pretty personally.  At the same time, though, all the awful things one sees aren't really as a result of Corypheus's competence, just a magical accident due to an interaction with Alexius.  

[taviastrife]

One thing in Bioware games (at least in recent games) is that it does feel like companions are untouchable.  I liked what they did with the sequence of Hawke and Stroud, that actually felt bold in terms of writing.  However, the actual group companions seem as if Bioware never wants to touch them with a ten-foot pole.  There's so much drama to be had if they would be willing to "kill their darlings," or at least maim them. I'm not sadistic, I swear!  

 

Anyway, I think the main thing I was disappointed about was that it felt like Skyhold was never in danger.  Granted, the Inquisitor makes short work of Cory's army, but how epic would it have been to have a big assault on your keep?  It didn't even have to be Cory; it could have been his dragon and the last remnants of the red templars assaulting.  And then you have to go back to the site of Haven and the breach to face Cory.

 

I understand why they didn't do that, seeing how the dragon was directly linked to Cory and such.  But, it would have been pretty neat.  And maybe it wouldn't have felt less anti-climatic to some.  To me, the ending wasn't terrible.  It's obvious more is planned either through DLC or a next game.  It had it's resolution with the main villain Cory and set up a few elements to hold onto for whatever is next.

 

Maybe people don't like happy endings because of the influx of tragic endings flooding games nowadays?  They're not used to seeing them as often and such endings possibly feel incomplete or out of place.  I will admit that the ending of DA:I felt so....wrapped up that I didn't know if I should feel satisfied or not.  But, thinking about it, the main story was completed and the rest felt like stepping stones into something bigger (especially that post credits scene).  I loved my Inquisitor, adored my companions, and felt like a badass.  DA:I managed to make me feel like my Inquisitor and advisers weren't just for show, that we meant business and were going to get results.  And we did.  That was the goal.

 

Also, I think that Inquisition was to show that Cory, even with ripping a hole in the sky, was only a small part in the grand scheme of things.  He's a small fish compared to the big.  There's much more than meets the eye.

 

With all that said, I do understand the gripes people have with the ending.  Even if I didn't mind it, there is plenty to critique.

[Eudaemonium]

Honestly, I think DA:I is one of the few heroic fantasy narratives I've witnessed where the hero consistently thwarts the villain. Cory strikes back minutely at Haven, but that basically just makes you stronger in the long-term since it drives you to kick-ass-mountain-fortress 9000.

 

You steal half his forces (Mages/Templars) and seal the Breach basically at the start of the game. You then foil his plans with both the Orlesian Civil War and the Wardens. The only way his plan succeeds in the Civil War is if it actually plays into the Inquisitor's hands. You basically either foil him completely or you pull off a Xanatos Gambit. Then Cory launches a last-ditch attempt to get a magical MacGuffin from an ancient Temple. You pursue him there, defeat his lieutenant, and then make off with the object right before his eyes in a rather hilarious reversal of the usual 'villain snatches doomsday device form the hero's hands' trope. Desperate, he mounts a last-minute solo assault on your personal DoomCastle because you've basically foiled him at every turn and he has nothing left.

 

Honestly, it's pretty hilarious.

[Iakus]

Eh, I'm just glad it's not another "No matter what u suck" end like ME3. About time we had a game where you can get a crapload of allies and armies and actually succeed. Unlike other people, I do not want a game where my progtaongist constantly fails and complains and angst like Shepard does in ME3. That got annoying hella quick.

So.  Much.  This.

[Bladenite1481]

Honestly, I think DA:I is one of the few heroic fantasy narratives I've witnessed where the hero consistently thwarts the villain. Cory strikes back minutely at Haven, but that basically just makes you stronger in the long-term since it drives you to kick-ass-mountain-fortress 9000.

 

You steal half his forces (Mages/Templars) and seal the Breach basically at the start of the game. You then foil his plans with both the Orlesian Civil War and the Wardens. The only way his plan succeeds in the Civil War is if it actually plays into the Inquisitor's hands. You basically either foil him completely or you pull off a Xanatos Gambit. Then Cory launches a last-ditch attempt to get a magical MacGuffin from an ancient Temple. You pursue him there, defeat his lieutenant, and then make off with the object right before his eyes in a rather hilarious reversal of the usual 'villain snatches doomsday device form the hero's hands' trope. Desperate, he mounts a last-minute solo assault on your personal DoomCastle because you've basically foiled him at every turn and he has nothing left.

 

Honestly, it's pretty hilarious.

Exactly, its comical. You never feel threatened by him, he's a darkspawn in a dunce cap. 

[Robert Cousland]

*Sigh* I guess it's true what they say, the destination is not as important as the journey. Especially true here, as that ending was extremely underwhelming.

[phaonica]

Tragedy with a  purpose is something that happens with scenes like the Ultimate Sacrifice or

Spoiler

Morrigan becoming enternally bound to Flemeth and essentially finding out she was her pawn all along if the former drank from the Well of Sorrows and what happened with Solas

.

 

Tragedy for the sake of it is something like ME3's story and endings where you're forced to be guilt ridden and some characters die simply for shock value.Or the scene with Hawke's mother in DA2 where he/she would've and should've had the common sense to warn his/her mother that there was a serial killer who targets middle aged women running around Kirkwall.

 

I dislike hamfisted situations like that because they have less impact.

 

 

 

I don't know if I can tell the difference, though.

 

The Ultimate Sacrifice is something that you can prepare for, and that you can accept or reject.

 

Being bound to Mythal is something that you only partially understand, but that can be accepted or rejected.

 

I suppose I'm at a disadvantage because I didn't play any of Mass Effect, so I'll never know the personal impact of the infamous ME3 ending. From what I understand, you do not have the option to manipulate the outcome.

 

You also do not have the ablity to manipulate the outcome of the story with Hawke's mother.

 

Is that the difference? That you are given a choice whether it's a tragedy or not?

[Estelindis]

One thing in Bioware games (at least in recent games) is that it does feel like companions are untouchable.  

 

I think the problem is that, by allowing companions to die, Bioware drastically reduces the impact they can have on future games.  They just can't afford to let world states in which Companion X lives be drastically different from world states in which that companion dies.  If they make sure that the companion is definitely alive, though, they can have some strong future narrative that involves the companion.  (And people would hate it if they forced a companion death on us with no way to stop it, so it's either definite survival or possible survival.)

[cjones91]

To put it simply,yes.The best tragedies are often the ones that happen no matter how much you try to stop it,having them hamfisted in the story where you are just a passive member going along with the flow is terrible in my opinion.I'd rather have a character dieor fail  because I screwed up in some way than to have them be forced just because.The former is more impactful.

[VelvetStraitjacket]

Oh, **** tragedy. I'm sick of tragic elements all over the place. I don't need people to die or my character getting ass kicked to feel "victorious", or that I earned it. And after ME3's knee-to-the-cooch ending, I'm glad to have a happy ending.

[stormhit]

I don't really mind the tragedy level, and I actually like the idea of a super powerful antagonist who is also kind of an inflexible flake...but what was kind of disappointing to me was just how easy it was for everyone to get along. From politics to companion relations; it was just all pretty mild. I had kind of assumed the expansion to 9 party members was going to mean it was more likely for people not to put up with your crap... but not really.

 

And the politics was similarly disappointing. I read everything and talked to everyone I could in WEWH, but the main feeling I was left with was "I wonder if I didn't open the right stone halla doors, because I feel like I missed lots of plot, yet everyone is just going along with me anyway." It was kind of like that for every decision. It seemed rare the inquisitor was ever even questioned particularly forcefully.

[InfinitePaths]

I agree, even though I think the story in this game is briliant.

 

Also, the final battle with Cory was by far the weakest mission in the game.The Solas part after was great though.

 

You just come to Cory, fight him, fight dragon, kill Cory.Nothing happened whatsoever.It was a huge let down when compared to the rest of the game.

[Kantr]

What about leaving someone in the fade and the chargers?

All these complainy threads I wish there was a filter to hide them

[Rawgrim]

This exactly.

 

There was at least one scene

Spoiler

during the Mage quest when you get sent to the future

where the threat of the Breach was immediate, tangible, and devastating. But after that, the conflict was all avoided and the threat was entirely diminished. It's a shame because when Corypheus first showed up on screen, I was thinking "Holy s**t, yes. Maybe we'll get some awesome revelations that will truely challenge my character's beliefs." But nope. Just kill dragons when they show up and you'll be fine.

 

Now that I think of it. Standing up to a strong opponent, and saving the world, is pretty much what most rpgs are about. This games has all the elements of this, for sure. But the thing is...I like overcoming the odds, and end up being a badass hero. DA:I does not have this at all. The villain trashes Haven, sure. But that is mostly his introduction. After that he does nothing. He could have destroyed a town or two, at least. If only to remind us he was out there. I don't feel heroic at all in this game. I am fighting someone who doesn't fight back. That is not being a hero. That is being a bully.