1194 réponses à ce sujet

[leaguer of one]

No, she has too little screen time and impact to be anything more than the source of fun speculation for the lore fans, the game itself revolved around Corypheus and how he was emblematic of the state of Thedas and it made for a weak main plot

Please. Her little screen time had the most impact in the game. In one moment find out the elven gods maybe still alive. The even more of what you think is going on in not what it seems. That something so big is going on you can fathom it. That the entire story is one gigantic forest and you still stuck look at the trees. Her moment in the game and her line "The truth is just the being. A herald, indeed, shout at the heaves. Ushering a new age" has one of the largest impact of the entire story of the series.

And if you take that line and look at all the arcs of the game your going to see that it has far more depth then your seeing because every story was about one thing, finding out the truth and what you do with it.

[Lady Artifice]

Fair enough. I wouldn't have been opposed to something grittier and darker myself.

 

Perhaps they felt that the loss of a companion was premature in the story. It only worked in ME1 because of the small cast and the fact that you had them both from the first mission. It doesn't translate well.

 

I agree. I don't think it should have been a companion. 

 

If I were to pick someone, I would have picked Gisele. 

 

Ouch, IMO. 

[Lady Artifice]

The fact that this is true for a lot of people is more than a little horrifying to me.

 

You believe it's a sign of desensitization? 

[leaguer of one]

The second part hardly speaks in it's favor.

 

And that's just it. You're measuring the loss as something calculable. You lose Haven, you lose resources.

 

But what is Haven itself to you? It's a writers job to give you a reason to care about those resources, to show you the loss of life in a way that carries weight.

 

::shrug:: It just fell a little flat for me. 

Ya, the was the entire first part of dai. The people you know and meet there are Heaven. That whats the loss. (Like the horse couple who died in the attack on Heaven. ) The only real problem all that get made up in moments.

[Steelcan]

Please. Her little screen time had the most impact in the game. In one moment find out the elven gods maybe still alive. The even more of what you think is going on in not what it seems. That something so big is going on you can fathom it. That the entire story is one gigantic forest and you still stuck look at the trees. Her moment in the game and her line "The truth is just the being. A herald, indeed, shout at the heaves. Ushering a new age" has one of the largest impact of the entire story of the series.

And if you take that line and look at all the arcs of the game your going to see that it has far more depth then your seeing because every story was about one thing, finding out the truth and what you do with it.

No

 

She showed up to help fuel speculation on the elven gods and keep the lore fanatics busy, the commentary on the central themes of DA belongs to Corypheus and his rant against the Maker.  it combines the ideas of faith/blind obedience, what it means to be "godlike" (especially in conjunction Solas) and so on.

 

Flemeth is little more than a cameo, and its proven when she gets offed in the credits.  Its a story about Gods and Faith, and Corypheus exemplifies that, not Flemeth

[TheJediSaint]

I see this thread has reached the nit-picking phase of its evolution.

[Lady Artifice]

Nitpicking. Analysis. 

 

To-ma-to, to-mah-to. 

[BabyPuncher]

This is what I meant by applying standards willy nilly. Its hard enough making a AAA video game that allows player choice, where did this requirement for a literate "masterpiece" come from?

 

It is hard. The developers have a hard, hard job. As hard as any writer or developer on the planet, I'm guessing. I can't think of any medium that is as relentlessly demanding as a modern story-driven RPG with player choices.

 

But it says right on their website that "BioWare's vision is to create, deliver, and evolve the most emotionally engaging games in the world."

 

The best in the world. It's a goal they've set themselves.

 

And a goal they've backed up when talking about past and future games. When they talk about the mistakes they've made and how they want to do better in the future.

 

The fact the players care enough about these things to complain about them should be taken as a great compliment.

[Lebanese Dude]

I agree. I don't think it should have been a companion. 

 

If I were to pick someone, I would have picked Gisele. 

 

Ouch, IMO. 

 

.......

 

.......

 

Ouch indeed.

[TheJediSaint]

I'm sure the companions of DAI breathed a collective sigh of relief when the learned none of them were at risk of being sacrificed at the alter of drama.

[leaguer of one]

No

 

She showed up to help fuel speculation on the elven gods and keep the lore fanatics busy, the commentary on the central themes of DA belongs to Corypheus and his rant against the Maker.  it combines the ideas of faith/blind obedience, what it means to be "godlike" (especially in conjunction Solas) and so on.

 

Flemeth is little more than a cameo, and its proven when she gets offed in the credits.  Its a story about Gods and Faith, and Corypheus exemplifies that, not Flemeth

Wrong. The lore is the story. The entire story of Dragon age is the story of it's people and lore. That what make  the impact of the story from dragon age origin. That's what make Solas' reveal such a huge impact.  The central theme is not about Cory and his rant against the maker. It's about why he has the rant against the maker. Because he found out the truth. Every story is about finding out hard truths and what people do with them. 

Flemeth cameo was about pointing it out. It's much bigger then you think it is. Her story is thedus' story which is the story of the entire series. Dragon age is a story about thedus and it's people.

DAI story is not about gods and faith but Truth and reaction.

[Aimi]

can you elaborate
 
(preferably without a wall of text that puts my term papers to shame?)

Players can view the deaths of countless innocent individuals in a game with equanimity. They only become "invested" in a situation, they can only be made to feel sad about that suffering, if they are confronted with ham-handed SYMBOLISM in the form of bad things happening to characters that they are supposed to care about. To some, the Dark Future isn't awful in and of itself; it's only awful because Leliana has been tortured and disfigured. Things like that. Like Lady Artifice said, they need to "carry weight".

If tragedies need to be shoved in a player's face before she acknowledges that they are tragic, then that is pretty horrifying to me.

Don't get me wrong - I understand perfectly well that this is the way most people who consume media operate. I can even agree, to a point, that it's true that good writing can involve giving those large-scale tragedies a human (or elven, dwarven, qunari, etc.) face. It's not necessarily wrong to criticize Inquisition's writing as perhaps not making those tragedies come through more clearly in the main plot. It's just, y'know, kind of awful that it's that way.

[Lady Artifice]

.......

 

.......

 

Ouch indeed.

 

At least it would have made the matter of favoring a candidate for divine make a lot more sense. 

[BabyPuncher]

I'm sure the companions of DAI breathed a collective sigh of relief when the learned none of them were at risk of being sacrificed at the alter of drama.

 

I think we can all agree that killing someone off for shock value or because "this scene/choice is too happy so this guy dies" as was the case for the ME 3 ending is very, very stupid. (At least in a story that makes very heavy promises of choices mattering and such.)

 

But sacrifice and flat-out loss does have very legitimate thematic value so long as it's done carefully.

[Aimi]

I agree. I don't think it should have been a companion. 
 
If I were to pick someone, I would have picked Gisele. 
 
Ouch, IMO.

For every person that would've been shocked and dismayed at her death, there'd be two more who'd be all, "pft whatever I'm actually kind of glad that obnoxious religious b*tch is dead, good riddance".

[Steelcan]

Wrong. The lore is the story. The entire story of Dragon age is the story of it's people and lore. That what make  the impact of the story from dragon age origin. That's what make Solas' reveal such a huge impact.  The central theme is not about Cory and his rant against the maker. It's about why he has the rant against the maker. Because he found out the truth. Every story is about finding out hard truths and what people do with them. 

Flemeth cameo was about pointing it out. It's much bigger then you think it is. Her story is thedus' story which is the story of the entire series. Dragon age is a story about thedus and it's people.

DAI story is not about gods and faith but Truth and reaction.

Its a huge impact only for those who care enough about the lore to bother looking into such.

 

The story and its central themes stand quite apart from that.

 

And DA:I is more about faith than truth.  Everywhere in DA:I we see the truth perverted and twisted, but faith is central the entire time, whether its Cassandra and Cullen with the Maker, Corypheus and his own power, Sera and the "normal world", or the Dalish and their connections to their (largely made up) past.  Such as with the Vallisin, the truth is that the markings were slave brands, but they have become more than that now

 

Jesus you have me taking the side of the Dalish

[Steelcan]

For every person that would've been shocked and dismayed at her death, there'd be two more who'd be all, "pft whatever I'm actually kind of glad that obnoxious religious b*tch is dead, good riddance".

I'd say there'd be three more than that who say "so what?"

[Lebanese Dude]

For every person that would've been shocked and dismayed at her death, there'd be two more who'd be all, "pft whatever I'm actually kind of glad that obnoxious religious b*tch is dead, good riddance".

 

How could anyone hate Giselle T_T  

 

[Lady Artifice]

Players can view the deaths of countless innocent individuals in a game with equanimity. They only become "invested" in a situation, they can only be made to feel sad about that suffering, if they are confronted with ham-handed SYMBOLISM in the form of bad things happening to characters that they are supposed to care about. To some, the Dark Future isn't awful in and of itself; it's only awful because Leliana has been tortured and disfigured. Things like that. Like Lady Artifice said, they need to "carry weight".

If tragedies need to be shoved in a player's face before she acknowledges that they are tragic, then that is pretty horrifying to me.

Don't get me wrong - I understand perfectly well that this is the way most people who consume media operate. I can even agree, to a point, that it's true that good writing can involve giving those large-scale tragedies a human (or elven, dwarven, qunari, etc.) face. It's not necessarily wrong to criticize Inquisition's writing as perhaps not making those tragedies come through more clearly in the main plot. It's just, y'know, kind of awful that it's that way.

 

Hmm. But it's not just gamers who are that way. It's people. We often need that in film, in literature, in most media. A death toll on such an enormous scale is just too much for most people to absorb.

 

It makes me think of what Mordin said in ME2. He needed to think about his nephew specifically because a number was just too impersonal.

 

It's a human failing, perhaps, but not necessarily a tragic one. If I could really process it every time I read of how many people died in every given large scale tragedy, I wouldn't have a lot of time to spend not being miserable. 

 

 

In fiction, the separation can be even greater. I don't know if I'd call it good or bad. I think it just is. 

[Obadiah]

...
But it says right on their website that [/size]"BioWare's vision is to create, deliver, and evolve the most emotionally engaging games in the world."
...

That doesn't mean the story needs to be a literary "masterpiece" or fulfill these technical requirements you're espousing. It means Bioware wants to create engaging stories. And they do.

[BabyPuncher]

That doesn't mean the story needs to be a literary "masterpiece" or fulfill these technical requirements you're espousing. It means Bioware wants to create engaging stories. And they do.

 

I'm pretty sure if you spoke to any BioWare employee and asked if they want their next game to be a masterpiece, they would answer yes.

[Steelcan]

Hmm. But it's not just gamers who are that way. It's people. We often need that in film, in literature, in most media. A death toll on such an enormous scale is just too much for most people to absorb.

 

It makes me think of what Mordin said in ME2. He needed to think about his nephew specifically because a number was just too impersonal.

 

It's a human failing, perhaps, but not necessarily a tragic one. If I could really process it every time I read of how many people died in every given large scale tragedy, I wouldn't have a lot of time to spend not being miserable. 

 

 

In fiction, the separation can be even greater. I don't know if I'd call it good or bad. I think it just is. 

Its everywhere, the reason Achilles fights the Trojans after being wronged, not because Greece needs him, is a personal feud because Patroclus was killed

 

Frodo may be saving all of Middle Earth but he starts out trying to save his home and the people there

 

Okabe may be saving the world from World War 3 but he's in it to save his childhood friend, and later his girlfriend

[leaguer of one]

Its a huge impact only for those who care enough about the lore to bother looking into such.

 

The story and its central themes stand quite apart from that.

 

And DA:I is more about faith than truth.  Everywhere in DA:I we see the truth perverted and twisted, but faith is central the entire time, whether its Cassandra and Cullen with the Maker, Corypheus and his own power, Sera and the "normal world", or the Dalish and their connections to their (largely made up) past.  Such as with the Vallisin, the truth is that the markings were slave brands, but they have become more than that now

 

Jesus you have me taking the side of the Dalish

If you played all 3 game you would already know about much of the detail of the worlds lore with out looking it up. You don't need to read the codex to know about the dread wolf or Vallisn. The character of the past 2 games tell you it. Marrill even tell you stories about them. And with DAI faith is not the central theme. In fact it even shows the bad guy being destroyed by his faith and Liliana. And yes the truth can be perverted and twisted. That's one of the points of the story. It's about the truth and the reaction to it. Perverting the truth and twisting it is one of the reactions to it. The game equally show revealing the truth as it is with many character like with Cassandra, Dorian, and Sera. And the dalish is the biggest example of it because there story was about revealing the truth of what happened. It's not a one sided point. The show both the positive and negative reactions

The point is every story is about reveling the truth and the reaction to it both positive or negative and acceptance or denial.

[Steelcan]

If you played all 3 game

I have

[Lady Artifice]

For every person that would've been shocked and dismayed at her death, there'd be two more who'd be all, "pft whatever I'm actually kind of glad that obnoxious religious b*tch is dead, good riddance".

 

I wouldn't bet against you about it. Though, I still believe that in general it would be more keenly felt than Roderick's death. 

 

But my point is beginning to run away from me. I don't actual mean, "kill someone dramatically to make it hurt." I'm just saying the whole scene could have used more power in general.