236 réponses à ce sujet

[JaegerBane]

Yeah, it's theh mechanics. My point was that very few players say they mind that Shepard fails to accomplish his mission on Thessia, whereas plenty say they mind the way he fails. Though as with many ME3 complaints, it's not quite clear why people are bothered by something in ME3 that went over fine in other games. I don't recall anyone complaining about Malak pulling the same damn thing in KotOR, or Saren slipping away on Virmire.

That's presumably why I didn't understand what people had an issue with. The boss getting away and succeeding no matter what you do was something that's happened many times before, as you say.

The base game was, while not terrible IMO, not great (although I've long wondered if it isn't actually a parody of RPG clichés given how utterly straight it seems to be playing those clichés, something Obsidian aren't normally known for), but the first expansion, Mask of the Betrayer is fantastic. Closest thing we've ever had to another Torment.

NWN2 was both one of the best and worst RPGs I've ever played. It felt like the devs made it their mission to saturate you with so many cliches you became desensitised to them, with every single cliche done to the best it possibly could be within the engine. I don't know of any other RPG that literally uses the 'rocks fall, everybody dies' mechanic to finish it.

MotB though.... Yeah. That was a work of art. I actually quite liked that they used the same character and tied it to NWN2's story to such an extent, as you didn't need any character backstory added in and could just get on with the adventure. I'd Defo recommend the gog.com NWN2 pack.

[SnakeCode]

Presumably that was replying to me? Put it another way I liked about 85% of the DA2 story, it just fell down in places in the last chapter. I have played lots of non-bioware games, over 500 I would guess.

Not you specifically no. It's just something I've noticed that happens on th BSN that I haven't seen anywhere else. People saying things like "you can't blame Bioware for being rushed in the development of DA2, blame EA." and "ok, so the story fell flat in some places, but you can see what they were trying to do, commend them on that at least." Everyone else's games are judged on the quality of the game itself, not on what they think the Developers are capable of.

 

The point about people who seemingly only play Bioware titles over and over was unrelated. Just another thing i've noticed and find a little odd.

[ThreeF]

The point about people who seemingly only play Bioware titles over and over was unrelated. Just another thing i've noticed and find a little odd.

BW games do have some pretty unique aspects that can't be easily found in other games.

[JaegerBane]

Presumably that was replying to me? Put it another way I liked about 85% of the DA2 story, it just fell down in places in the last chapter. I have played lots of non-bioware games, over 500 I would guess.

I think the part where it fell down for me was at the start of Act 2. Up until then I actually thought it was pretty good - here I was, making a name for myself and my whiny brother, gathering my merry band, training in the ways of the Force (Mage). And ZOMG wtf have I found in the Deep Roads? So *this* is where the game is going, great, bring it on!....

....uh, what? You mean.... All that was just a side quest, and I'm back in this damn city? NOOOOOOOOO!

Although Act 3 was where it started feeling like the devs were actively trolling me.

[CronoDragoon]

I think the part where it fell down for me was at the start of Act 2. Up until then I actually thought it was pretty good - here I was, making a name for myself and my whiny brother, gathering my merry band, training in the ways of the Force (Mage). And ZOMG wtf have I found in the Deep Roads? So *this* is where the game is going, great, bring it on!....

....uh, what? You mean.... All that was just a side quest, and I'm back in this damn city? NOOOOOOOOO!

Although Act 3 was where it started feeling like the devs were actively trolling me.

 

Personally, I still think Act 2 represents the best extended stretch of storytelling in a Dragon Age game. In Your Heart Shall Burn comes close, but it's much shorter. Comparatively, Act 2 is probably closer to 1/2 the game than 1/3, it develops the characters well, ties some characters into the main plot, many of the side quests deal either with the Qunari problem or Hawke (by way of familial or companion troubles) which lends it a focus that Dragon Age rarely has had, and the entire end stretch is an exhibit of making choices and dealing with the consequences, from Isabela leaving all the way to deciding what to do with the Arishok.

 

Imagine if Act 2 and 3 had been switched, and that Meredith and Orsino weren't mandated to go insane, but rather that Hawke was able to forge a truce between them. Suddenly their coming together to fight the Arishok at the end of the game has a lot more weight. Of course, what's good for Dragon Age 2's story isn't necessarily good for the series, and ultimately it was probably a good call to necessitate the mage/templar war, as I think most people were bored with the Circles as they were at that point.

[Fredward]

I'd agree on what you say about Dragon Age 2 - not just regarding his family, but realistically every major situation of note in the game (most spectacularly demonstrated by the end of Act 3, where Hawkes of all persuasions were treated to the conclusions of their quest by having everything mutate into giant monsters and explode), but Thessia ranked as one of my most enjoyable missions in the entire Mass Effect saga, principally because that mission left Shepard somewhere between complete despair and total rage, which fed into the whole endgame.

In short, I don't mind being given a no-win scenario so long as the story makes use of the resulting narrative. DA2 was relentless in its refusal to do this.

 

I quite liked the fallout of the mission as well, made Shepard feel human. I did not like how the mission itself was executed though.

[PhroXenGold]

Yeah, that was my take on it too; if not a parody, then a deliberate toying with the tropes. Note that KotOR 2, in some ways, is opposed to Star Wars itself. Which I kind of liked since the setting always struck me as kind of silly.

 

KotOR2 is an utterly brutal deconstruction of pretty much everything central to Star Wars. Which is probably why the story (if not neccesarily every aspect of the game) is the best that the SW expanded universe has ever seen.

[TacoBellBurrito]

DA2 was by far the worst game Bioware have ever made. Even if you enjoy it, you have to admit it's just an objectively bad game. From the graphics, to the gameplay, to the writing. It's all terrible. Even the awful attempts at humour with refrences to pop culture was awful. "I like big boats and I cannot lie." Really Bioware, really?
 
It was a masterclass in how NOT to make a good rpg.
 
Inquisition isn't magnificent by any means, but DA2 makes it look incredible by comparison.

Im sorry but just nah. Absolute massive amounts of nah. Criticism of the graphics and aesthetic when DAO looked like the most generic fantasy game Ive ever seen? I mean seriously DAO couldve just been a mod for a LOTR game and it would have looked exactly the same.

Then theres the DAO plot, oh hey go save the world from a dragon and zombies. Yes genius storytelling right there, totally havent seen that plot a hundred times before.

DA2 had its flaws but it craps all over DAO in everything but the size of it if you ask me. Objectively Origins was the most inferior of the 3 with DAI being the fully realized vision they originally had in mind with Thedas. Thats just me though of course

[AlanC9]

Im sorry but just nah. Absolute massive amounts of nah. Criticism of the graphics and aesthetic when DAO looked like the most generic fantasy game Ive ever seen? I mean seriously DAO couldve just been a mod for a LOTR game and it would have looked exactly the same.

I gotta go with SnakeCode on the aesthetics. DA:O has bland graphics, but at least they're not actively annoying. I actually put off buying the game after playing the demo. Which in retrospect was a mistake, since I like the rest of the game pretty much.

[TevinterSupremacist]

DA's story themes have always been ridiculously generic, "ancient evil rises", "fantasy bigotry" and "who watches the guardians" have been done a million times. What got me into the DA franchise was not what it was doing, storywise, but how.

[JaegerBane]

Personally, I still think Act 2 represents the best extended stretch of storytelling in a Dragon Age game. In Your Heart Shall Burn comes close, but it's much shorter. Comparatively, Act 2 is probably closer to 1/2 the game than 1/3, it develops the characters well, ties some characters into the main plot, many of the side quests deal either with the Qunari problem or Hawke (by way of familial or companion troubles) which lends it a focus that Dragon Age rarely has had, and the entire end stretch is an exhibit of making choices and dealing with the consequences, from Isabela leaving all the way to deciding what to do with the Arishok.

Imagine if Act 2 and 3 had been switched, and that Meredith and Orsino weren't mandated to go insane, but rather that Hawke was able to forge a truce between them. Suddenly their coming together to fight the Arishok at the end of the game has a lot more weight. Of course, what's good for Dragon Age 2's story isn't necessarily good for the series, and ultimately it was probably a good call to necessitate the mage/templar war, as I think most people were bored with the Circles as they were at that point.

I think the problem wasn't Act 2's method of storytelling. While I don't think it was anything special, it was quite competent.

It fell down because It failed with its expectations. Up until it started I was thinking that I was going to learn of the origin of profanes, of red lyrium, of a secret dwarven past that had only now been revealed. Instead, I got to see a bunch of Qunari refugees ragequit a city that I was sick of the sight of. While I won't deny there were some interesting scenes, there was a recurring issue in the game where the plot seemed to believe I actually gave a damn about what was going on, and didn't need to draw me in. Act 2's Central plot would have made an interesting side quest but not a pillar of the entire story.

[Tensai]

My personal fun rating:

 

DA:O > DA2 > DA:I

 

I have finished: 

 

DA:O 3 or 4 times,

DA2, 3 times

DA:I only once <- because "yawny" gameplay and not enough freedom in chracter development (plot related hard/evil choices like in DA:O/DA2/Mass Effect Games) 

[Draining Dragon]

BW games do have some pretty unique aspects that can't be easily found in other games.

Except those made by Obsidian.

[CronoDragoon]

It fell down because It failed with its expectations. Up until it started I was thinking that I was going to learn of the origin of profanes, of red lyrium, of a secret dwarven past that had only now been revealed. Instead, I got to see a bunch of Qunari refugees ragequit a city that I was sick of the sight of. While I won't deny there were some interesting scenes, there was a recurring issue in the game where the plot seemed to believe I actually gave a damn about what was going on, and didn't need to draw me in. Act 2's Central plot would have made an interesting side quest but not a pillar of the entire story.

 

The plot gave you plenty of opportunities to draw you in, but if you don't care about the characters and the setting then, yes, you won't give a damn about it being threatened. However, I don't see how that's any different from all other plots in existence. If the argument then becomes whether the plot gave you ample opportunity to become invested in the characters, then I'd say that's clearly yes.

 

Your first point though is well-taken. The red lyrium is never taken seriously as a central plot point and ends up only as a plot device to fuel a Meredith boss battle. My response would be that I never felt the game promised me that the red lyrium would be the central plot point to begin with. The mage/templar conflict is given far more screentime in Act 1, as were Hawke's family/money troubles and his relationships with his companions.

[JaegerBane]

The plot gave you plenty of opportunities to draw you in, but if you don't care about the characters and the setting then, yes, you won't give a damn about it being threatened. However, I don't see how that's any different from all other plots in existence. If the argument then becomes whether the plot gave you ample opportunity to become invested in the characters, then I'd say that's clearly yes.
 
Your first point though is well-taken. The red lyrium is never taken seriously as a central plot point and ends up only as a plot device to fuel a Meredith boss battle. My response would be that I never felt the game promised me that the red lyrium would be the central plot point to begin with. The mage/templar conflict is given far more screentime in Act 1, as were Hawke's family/money troubles and his relationships with his companions.

It's different in the sense that all of this doesn't really concern Hawke (which is, again, a recurring issue). If Shepard just chucked it all in, he'd end up as genetic paste. If the Warden chucked it all in, he'll watch his homeland turn to rot. If Revan chucked it all in, he'd be living under a fascist society. If NWN2's Knight-Captain just chucked it in, he'd be devoured from the inside out. If Adam Jensen packed it all in, he'd spend the rest of his life wondering why he was nearly killed and who killed his ex. If the Inquisitor chucked it in... Well, he actually saw the result.

With Hawke, i didn't understand why he was getting involved. He's risking his life, he's endangering his family by sticking around, and depending on his class he's highlighting himself as an apostate to a whack job known for hating Mages. For what? His house? The story just basically shouted 'JUST BECAUSE! DIS IS DRAGON AGE AND UR TEH HERO!'.

As for the issue about red lyrium... I'd submit that an entirely new, unknown substance responsible for the biggest plot twist so far had more emphasis then more medieval soap opera. But maybe that's just me

[NextGenCowboy]

For his/her friends, to make a better life for himself and those around him/her, for money and fame, and status. Those are all valid reasons for someone to wake up in the morning, and do what they do. As Silly Hawke says "Don't worry, helping people, and killing people are what I'm best at".

[Bfler]

The excuse with the short development time, which is mentioned over and over again, is silly. DA2 has major flaws, like the repeating and static areas, which turn it into an inferior product. The reason for it is absolutely irrelevant. A flaw is a flaw and not tolerable, especially in case of a company, which creates "branded goods".
Do the same as any service provider, e.g a designer, with your clients and you can prepare yourself for trouble.

[JaegerBane]

For his/her friends, to make a better life for himself and those around him/her, for money and fame, and status. Those are all valid reasons for someone to wake up in the morning, and do what they do. As Silly Hawke says "Don't worry, helping people, and killing people are what I'm best at".

FWIW the best my inner devil's advocate could come up with was that Hawke had already been kicked out of his first home by an invading force and had lost a sibling over it, now he'd lost another and he was done running and was going to stand his ground through sheer bloody-mindedness.

The issue is, as the player, I should have had the option to decide that, and I sure as hell shouldn't be trying to work out a reason to explain wtf my boneheaded character is doing. Ergo my opinion of DA2's story and my assertion that the story expected me to care without bothering to draw me in.

[Phoe77]

If not wanting to see your homeland turn to rot is a good enough reason for the Warden to do his thing, I don't see why not wanting to see your new home destroyed isn't a good enough reason for Hawke's involvement.  

 

I don't know if the game ever forced Hawke to acknowledge it, but there are many things in the game which seem to hint that Hawke and his friends were simply tired of being forced from the homes and lives they made for themselves.  Bethany even says essentially the same thing in one of  her dialogues, and Hawke can say that he's not going to be forced out anymore if you choose a certain dialogue choice.  

[JaegerBane]

If not wanting to see your homeland turn to rot is a good enough reason for the Warden to do his thing, I don't see why not wanting to see your new home destroyed isn't a good enough reason for Hawke's involvement.

Well, the obvious difference is that clearly, an entire country (along with population) becoming corrupted into a twisted mess with fates quite literally worse than death for every man, woman and child in Ferelden is hardly similar to a bunch of Qunari causing mayhem in a city for a bit - it wasn't even like everyone in Kirkwall was against the Qunari. That comparison is ridiculous.

As I say, I can make a guess at what the hell Hawke thinks he's doing, but I shouldn't have to be guessing. This is my avatar in the game. It should have been my decision whether to stay or fight. At the very least, there should have been a very good reason why I was sticking around in such an insane situation.

[NextGenCowboy]

That's a bit arbitrary though, isn't it? I mean where's the distinctive cutoff? The city's falling all around me, I can either stay or leave, versus Ferelden is falling to the Blight, I should stay, or leave. You're okay with one, but not the other?

 

An entire country falling to the Blight, versus an entire city killed, turned into slaves, or forcibly converted, both are terrible fates. I take issue with a lot of aspects of DA2. The choice to stay and fight in that situation being forced wasn't one of them. It should also be noted that the situation explodes quickly. It does deterioate over time, but the actual lead-up is very quick.

 

Opting out is almost never an option. You can't just stop chasing Saren for example, you can't just leave Ferelden and let Weashaupt deal with the issue. The difference is, DA2 happens on a smaller scale. Also, due to the distinct personalities of Hawke, it's not so much guessing as picking which one makes the most sense, is most important. You're even given the option in Chapter 1 of saying why you stay in Kirkwall, so that can then be easily applied when you've actually laid down roots in the city as a reason.

[AlanC9]

If the Warden chucked it all in, he'll watch his homeland turn to rot.

Well, except for dwarven Wardens. And Dalish.

[sim-ran]

For his/her friends, to make a better life for himself and those around him/her, for money and fame, and status. Those are all valid reasons for someone to wake up in the morning, and do what they do. As Silly Hawke says "Don't worry, helping people, and killing people are what I'm best at".

I just don't see it. The way Hawke ends up helping literally every sect of society doesn't make sense to me unless you RP them as the most paragon of paragon's. There's often options that focus on getting paid but they're often ridiculous. The woman asking you to investigate her missing Templar brother I'd clearly poor - is her measly sum really enough to go directly into the Templars limelight? Especially when the game reminds you time and time again that your motivation is to AVOID their notice, because either you or your sister are an apostate? Same deal with the elf asking you to help her dreamer son.

I wouldn't have minded playing mega paragon as that's how I usually play anyway, but it is simply impossible for Hawke to BE a paragon. The introduction to the character is abandoning their home country and the problems there to look after their family, then do some very bad things to get into Kirkwall as a refugee (robbing or stealing - take your pick! ) and then get enough money together for a treasure hunt with the end goal of getting rich.

What kind of character can be reconciled with these actions? Everything they do is about looking after themselves/their family, it comes before everyone and everything else. Then the "open" world starts and you seem to spend all your time helping ALL people in distress, the very opposite of the character that has just been established.

I have never been able to come up with a single character concept that works as an RPed in DA2. Not one!

[JaegerBane]

That's a bit arbitrary though, isn't it? I mean where's the distinctive cutoff? The city's falling all around me, I can either stay or leave, versus Ferelden is falling to the Blight, I should stay, or leave. You're okay with one, but not the other?

The distinctive cutoff, as you ask, is really whether or not the main character could realistically justify cutting and running. I don't necessarily mind being given no option to choose what to do so long as the opposing choice would have been clearly ridiculous I.e. If I stop chasing saren/walk away from the blight/etc then the result of the world ending or the character perishing is virtually certain. If the situation is dubious enough that a normal, level-headed character could justify leaving then I expect a choice to continue.

The reason I'm ok with one but not the other is because they're not related. It's like comparing Chernobyl or the Black Death with third world race riot. There's a huge difference of scale and potential results there which realistically put them in two completely different categories, so I don't see the logic of what goes for one must go for the other.

In Hawke's case, he even ends up fighting alongside the people who he opposes a few years later, and depending on how you played it, he has far more rapport and mutual respect with the Arishok then he does with Meredith, and that was obvious from the get go given Meredith's position. It just wasn't a given that the Qunari attempting a coup was such a clear threat to Hawke that the only solution was to oppose it in the same way one had to oppose Saren/the Blight/the Spirit Eater curse/the Conspiracy/the Breach etc.

[Cyonan]

The distinctive cutoff, as you ask, is really whether or not the main character could realistically justify cutting and running. I don't necessarily mind being given no option to choose what to do so long as the opposing choice would have been clearly ridiculous I.e. If I stop chasing saren/walk away from the blight/etc then the result of the world ending or the character perishing is virtually certain. If the situation is dubious enough that a normal, level-headed character could justify leaving then I expect a choice to continue.

The reason I'm ok with one but not the other is because they're not related. It's like comparing Chernobyl or the Black Death with third world race riot. There's a huge difference of scale and potential results there which realistically put them in two completely different categories, so I don't see the logic of what goes for one must go for the other.

In Hawke's case, he even ends up fighting alongside the people who he opposes a few years later, and depending on how you played it, he has far more rapport and mutual respect with the Arishok then he does with Meredith, and that was obvious from the get go given Meredith's position. It just wasn't a given that the Qunari attempting a coup was such a clear threat to Hawke that the only solution was to oppose it in the same way one had to oppose Saren/the Blight/the Spirit Eater curse/the Conspiracy/the Breach etc.

 

Realistically, you should have a harder time justifying staying in Ferelden in Origins than leaving. Especially if you're playing a Dwarven or Dalish Warden, where Ferelden is not their homeland.

 

Strategically, the best option is to sacrifice it to the blight and regroup with the Wardens that were coming from Orlais and still use your treaties to get help from Dwarves, Mages, and Elves elsewhere. No it's not great for Ferelden, but blights usually do a lot of damage and aren't ended quickly.

 

The only reason you win is because this blight politely waits after destroying Lothering for you to gather an army.