1194 réponses à ce sujet

[Shechinah]

(to BabyPuncher) Oh, I know that but I did not want to chance derailing this thread by bringing up the writing of Mass Effect 3 and Dragon Age 2's ending.  

[In Exile]

One thing about Mythal I think gets overlooked is one of the very things that makes Morrigan so confident in drinking from the Well.

Mythal was murdered.

Yet Flemeth is both herself and Mythal, and in the Fade outright says she wants revenge for what Mythal suffered as if Mythal was some other being, while also being Mythal and could control Morrigan or the Inquisitor.

I think it's actually near impossible to tell where Mythal ends and Flemeth begins.

It's no different than Justice and Anders in that regard.

[X Equestris]

We don't actually know if the GWs and the AD wipe each other out. The Wardens seem to think so but that doesn't mean anything. Their explanation for it is wrong, since we see two souls co-exist in one body with the OGB.

And I gave you an explanation for that. It's the willingness factor. And depending when a fertilized embryo receives a soul in the DA universe, there might not be one present when the Archdemon is slain.

[God]

Because he’s ridiculous.

 

Because he takes every opportunity to endorse the idiotically childish notion that more failure and death equates to more maturity, sophistication, ‘realism,’ and intelligence. A notion largely at play behind the abysmal state of the writing industry as a whole.

 

Because he's an appalling hypocrite who wholeheartedly embraces the same tropes he sneers at.

 

Because he crowns himself a master of 'realism' and is too incompetent to reason through how his methods push fiction further towards pretend-land and farther away from reality.

 

You'll have to explain your method there, David. So far, all I'm seeing is you making a lot of (unsupported) claims that seep more with personal anger of the invalidation of your own views than any actual failure of writing or actual usage of what terms you're ascribing to GMMR. 

 

Sounds more like you're angry at the world because they don't believe in your childish fantasies of black and white objective morality and idiot heroism. 

 

I motion to have your perspective discarded as irrelevant.

 

So far, all you're doing is proving who the real clown is. And it's certainly not anyone else but yourself.

[In Exile]

And I gave you an explanation for that. It's the willingness factor. And depending when a fertilized embryo receives a soul in the DA universe, there might not be one present when the Archdemon is slain.

 

What I'm saying is that there's no reason to actually take it for granted that the GWs kill an AD when they both get nuked. Corypheus seems to force his soul just fine on the unwilling. 

[X Equestris]

What I'm saying is that there's no reason to actually take it for granted that the GWs kill an AD when they both get nuked. Corypheus seems to force his soul just fine on the unwilling.

He does have his mind bending powers. It was why the Wardens had to use non-Warden mages to seal him away in the first place. And other than in Legacy, we only see him hop to dead bodies( at the Temple of Mythal and sort of implied at the Conclave).

[Dark Helmet]

You'll have to explain your method there, David. So far, all I'm seeing is you making a lot of (unsupported) claims that seep more with personal anger of the invalidation of your own views than any actual failure of writing or actual usage of what terms you're ascribing to GMMR. 

 

Sounds more like you're angry at the world because they don't believe in your childish fantasies of black and white objective morality and idiot heroism. 

 

I motion to have your perspective discarded as irrelevant.

 

So far, all you're doing is proving who the real clown is. And it's certainly not anyone else but yourself.

 

Ohhhh yesssssssss......

[Steelcan]

David is just mad Robb Stark ended up a furry and not on the throne

[Dark Helmet]

David is just mad Robb Stark ended up a furry and not on the throne

 

Heh heh heh

[dragonflight288]

deleted post.

[Junebug]

I wasn't! It sets up for a very promising sequel; almost made up for all of the busywork (mandatory "side" quests are a huge no-no to me). I love discussing the ending with people, which is made even more interesting if people romanced Solas. So many possibilities! I recommend watching Geek Remix's theories here. They're insightful and fun to discuss! She always backs her theories up with very strong evidence.

 

Sidenote: Also disagree about ME3's ending. Yes, it could have been better but I accepted it, especially after having some very in-depth conversations about it (re: stuff like this analysis). No matter, BioWare is one of the best storytellers out there. I just wish EA treated them with the modicum of respect that they deserve so that they can do their games as much justice as they are fully capable of doing. Instead of pressuring them for profits.

[King Dragonlord]

It was a weak ending but not as bad as Mass Effect 3. 

 

But more important than whether the ending was good in and of itself was the impact that it had retroactively on the experience. It made most of what I did not matter. When I went into a second playthrough (to see if there was any possibility space to explore) I realized that there was no point in doing anything more than the minimum. And pretty early on that second playthrough started to feel obligatory. Moments that barely worked the first time around started to feel campy and cheesy.

 

If you're thinking "Yes but you played the game through twice." Know that I have played Dragon Age Origins clean through at least 8 or 9 times (though some of the latter runs were aided by "Skip the Fade" "Skip Ostagar" and "Instant Death" to speed through the combat). I even played Dragon Age II at least 4 times. 

 

I also bought all the DLC for both of those games. As of this writing, Jaws of Hakkon has been released for DAI and I have no interest in buying it (and its not like I'm strapped for cash. I've since bought a console, a portable, games for both and games for my computer). It just occurred to me that for all I know you're going to reply "Its free ******". I haven't even checked to see what Jaws of Hakkon costs. Thats how little I care about it. I'm not even sure I'm spelling it right.

 

So you might be thinking "You say you don't care but you're hear arguing about it." Well 1) I kind of care about the first two games (I used to care more but DAI has retroactively affected my enjoyment of the entire series) 2) The game is an interesting conversation piece not for its story so much as its construction and the history of its development.: 

-You can see the vestigial attribute system (I say vestigial because its obvious that if DAI were the first game in the series, we wouldn't even be seeing the attributes, but they were in earlier games so they're paid lip service here)

-You can see all the places where they overcompensated for complaints about DA2 (especially with the diversity of the maps. Boy howdy did they address the hell out of that complaint).

-You can compare it to Pillars of Eternity and note how two games with a common ancestry can develop in such wildly different directions. You can even compare how they address some of the same complaints differently. I'd argue that DAI's potion system is trying to fix the same thing as POE's Health/Endurance system for example. And I think DAI scrapped the attribute system for the same reason that POE revamped it, because the original attribute system always resulted in best builds (hence DAI just goes ahead and gives you the attributes your character should have while POE found interesting ways to make the attributes more useful for more types of builds, a better innovation). 

 

But its not interesting in a way that draws me into the world. Not like the previous games were. Not like other games are. And the ending was their last chance to fix that.

[BabyPuncher]

(to BabyPuncher) Oh, I know that but I did not want to chance derailing this thread by bringing up the writing of Mass Effect 3 and Dragon Age 2's ending.  

 

Sarcasm aside, that's not overwhelmingly far off from the truth.
 

[blahblahblah]

Sarcasm aside, that's not overwhelmingly far off from the truth.

Everytime you justify your opinions makes you hard to be taken seriously.

[TheDovah]

I found the ending to be very anti-climatic and it lacked any sense of urgency. If Corypheus could reopen the breach at any time, he should have used his army or what remained of it to attack Skyhold to distract the Inquisitor whilst he reopens it instead of pretty much making it too easy for the Inquisitor. The entire final battle with him was too easy and i never felt that i was fighting for the survival of the world. Origins had the Archdemon trick the Warden into believing Redcliffe was about to be destroyed by the horde whilst it focused on Denerim and showed the urgency of getting to Denerim before the horde killed everyone. Inquisition had random snap to the Temple of Ashes where a few mooks fight Corypheus and for some reason, the ruins are flying. If he could do that, why not kill the Inquisitor by throwing the entire lot on top of them? Or send his false archdemon to attack Skyhold along with his remains of his army whilst he invades the fade. It's just a weak ending and it seems that Bioware rushed the last third of the game.

[KaiserShep]

Part of me does like the idea of Corypheus mounting an attack on Skyhold, sort of like how Sauron's forces attacked Minas Tirith. The problem is that the story has us whittling down the enemy forces gradually over the course of the campaign, with us wiping out Red Templars, to clearing out the Venatori and then cutting off the bulk of the demon army at Adamant. Now, if Corypheus decided to take advantage of the fact that the Inquisition's armies were still out in the Arbor Wilds, and flew in with Coryphedragon and blew open a new breach above it to storm it with demons, that could be something.

[Obadiah]

...
If he could do that, why not kill the Inquisitor by throwing the entire lot on top of them? Or send his false archdemon to attack Skyhold along with his remains of his army whilst he invades the fade.
...

It means Corypheus, even though he (or maybe "it") is wielding immense power, really doesn't fully understand or control that power. From the moment he tried to take back the anchor and couldn't at Haven we were made aware of this.

[In Exile]

Part of me does like the idea of Corypheus mounting an attack on Skyhold, sort of like how Sauron's forces attacked Minas Tirith. The problem is that the story has us whittling down the enemy forces gradually over the course of the campaign, with us wiping out Red Templars, to clearing out the Venatori and then cutting off the bulk of the demon army at Adamant. Now, if Corypheus decided to take advantage of the fact that the Inquisition's armies were still out in the Arbor Wilds, and flew in with Coryphedragon and blew open a new breach above it to storm it with demons, that could be something.

That can risk a plot hole. If Corypheus can just summon up a large enough army to siege Skyhold (which unless Cullen is insane would still have a reasonable garrison) then we'd ask why he didn't just plant his ass in the woods and keep summoning demons without the GWs.

Put differently if he had the means to rebuild his forces alone then his assaulting you doesn't make sense.

Edit: I should add I think the idea is great.

[TheDovah]

It does seem a bit odd that ol' Corypheus didn't use his false Archdemon to devestate the armies of the Inquisitor and Orlais to give himself the time he needed to reach the fountain.  He seems to have overlooked the use of Darkspawn or was foolish enough to avoid taking advantage of the biggest threat to thedas.

[KaiserShep]

That can risk a plot hole. If Corypheus can just summon up a large enough army to siege Skyhold (which unless Cullen is insane would still have a reasonable garrison) then we'd ask why he didn't just plant his ass in the woods and keep summoning demons without the GWs.
Put differently if he had the means to rebuild his forces alone then his assaulting you doesn't make sense.
Edit: I should add I think the idea is great.

Yeah this is why I couldn't seriously endorse the idea. Much of the game would have to be rewritten for this sequence to work. But, I think what might have been effective would be using the arbor wilds as the lead-in battle, perhaps using the eluvian as part of the endgame. I dunno.

[In Exile]

It does seem a bit odd that ol' Corypheus didn't use his false Archdemon to devestate the armies of the Inquisitor and Orlais to give himself the time he needed to reach the fountain.  He seems to have overlooked the use of Darkspawn or was foolish enough to avoid taking advantage of the biggest threat to thedas.

Given how it's his obvious weakness and really his ONLY weakness it makes sense he'd never risk his immortality unless his entire plot collapsed on itself.

I think the answer to the dark spawn point is made in-game: Corypheus purports to be the same being that he always was before his entering the Fade, namely, a magister.

More importantly using darkspawn might prematurely unify the realms against him if people believed it was a blight.

[KaiserShep]

I imagine he'd consider the darkspawn to be a pest in the world he wishes to rule.

[BabyPuncher]

Even if he did attack Shyhold, it really doesn't address the problem at all if the battle proceeded the same way.

[shinynotshiny]

Surely this is an exaggeration. ME3s ending was a betrayal.

 

But you're right. I didn't get much from DAIs ending (or Corypheus in general).

[BabyPuncher]

Surely this is an exaggeration. ME3s ending was a betrayal.

 

But you're right. I didn't get much from DAIs ending (or Corypheus in general).

 

That it was.

 

But so is this. So is making the conflict pointless. So is pretending to your audience your characters are heroic when they're vapid dullards.
 

Inquisition never had anything close to the brilliant moments of the ME series, so the 'dropped ball' doesn't really have a long way to fall, so to speak.