15883 réponses à ce sujet

[nici2412]

To be honest, I didn't like the quest.

Spoiler

It was just too obvious. Cerys even tells you a few minutes earlier that she has to do something terrible but you have to trust her. Would have liked if throwing the baby into the oven would have been indeed the terrible choice. The monster can create illusions (he did it with Ciri) He could have made a illusion of Cerys, which kidnapped the baby and you would have killed it if you decide to throw it into the oven.

But I guess that's just "too grim" and CDP didn't want to risk that you could have killed a baby as a consequence of your choice)

[Xetykins]

Oh no, that's too much for me.

[nici2412]

I can see that it would be too much for some people, but of all games the witcher series would be a place for this kind of stuff.

And it's not like you couldn't avoid it. It would be a consequence of a choice.Some consequences should  make you feel uncomfortable if you make the wrong choice.  

The current quest is just lame. It's not only too obvious but there is also no real drawback. The monster either disappears or it disappears after you fought it.

[Lawrence0294]

I can see that it would be too much for some people, but of all games the witcher series would be a place for this kind of stuff.

And it's not like you couldn't avoid it. It would be a consequence of a choice.Some consequences should  make you feel uncomfortable if you make the wrong choice.  

The current quest is just lame. It's not only too obvious but there is also no real drawback. The monster either disappears or it disappears after you fought it.

I'm not sure that all quest necessarily need decisions that can lead to bad consequences. The quest was more a question of how do you want to tackle an issue and whether you trust enough Cerys for throwing a baby in the oven. You trust her, and you succeed her way, or you don't trust her, and you succeed your way. It's a branching quest with two variants and I'm ok with that.

[nici2412]

I'm not sure that all quest necessarily need decisions that can lead to bad consequences. The quest was more a question of how do you want to tackle an issue and whether you trust enough Cerys for throwing a baby in the oven. You trust her, and you succeed her way, or you don't trust her, and you succeed your way. It's a branching quest with two variants and I'm ok with that.

Not all choices need bad consequences that's true. The problem is that very few choices in Witcher 3 lead to really bad consequences. The only one I can think of is the tree spirit. It's one of the very few choices, which fit with the core theme of the Witcher series. "You have to choose the lesser evil." There are just too many obvious good vs bad choices and no choices at all.

The question if you trust Cerys would have been great in theory but it was poorly executed. Cerys even tells you a few minutes before that she has to do something terrible but you have to trust her. In combination with Cerys likeable character, there was no reason to not trust her imo.

[Xetykins]

What happens if you give back the baby?

Btw, I liked all the grey and bad consequences in TW3. It's just that I have a really soft spot for babies and children ,that's why I never killed Connor in DAO but sacrificed Isolde once. And the possession quest i was distracted a bit and when I looked at my screen there was so little left on the timer, so I clicked on whatever my mouse was on :/

[nici2412]

What happens if you give back the baby?

 

Spoiler

You just have to fight the monster. As far as I remember there were no other consequences. Wanted to check it out on youtube but couldn't find a a video from someone who didn't throw the baby into the oven once you advanced that far in the quest, which should tell a lot about how onesided the quest is.

The same applies to the king/queen choice. You will find barely anybody who supported Hjalmar. Though why should anybody do this?

The whole choice is basically tradition vs progression. The problem is that keeping the tradition is presented in the worst possible light.

- during their quests Cerys achieved her goal by curing the Jarl, no matter what you do. Hjalmar on the other hand looses almost his whole crew while slaying the ice giant.

- Cerys is presented as cunning and calm, while Hjalmar is shown as hot headed, impulsive and a bit incapable

- Choosing Cerys will lead you to the people responsible for the bears attacks, while choosing Hjalmar will only help you to find the "tools" for the attack

- If you choose Hjalmar he will start a war against Nilfgaard, which will lead to the Skellige people being soaked in blood. Cerys will keep peace and Skellige will progress

- On top of that there is a place of power, which is only accessible if you choose Cerys.

There is no reason to choose Hjalmar. I was surprised they didn't show us a developer note, that we should support Cerys.

It's a hit and miss regarding the choices in Witcher 3. Some are difficult but too many are clearly good vs bad ones. I definitely prefer the previous games in this regard.

[Monica83]

Please avoid spoilers... i still have to play the game.... i will start this week..

[nici2412]

Please avoid spoilers... i still have to play the game.... i will start this week..

You are right, Sorry for that.

[Monica83]

What i think dragon age should take from the witcher... Is the world consistency.. Maybe it's me but i feel each sequel instead of expanding the lore attempts to turn dragon age in something else..

And get rid of that politically correct nonsense... it only kills depth

[Gwydden]

What i think dragon age should take from the witcher... Is the world consistency.. Maybe it's me but i feel each sequel instead of expanding the lore attempts to turn dragon age in something else..

And get rid of that politically correct nonsense... it only kills depth

Very much this. It isn't even a matter of opinion. DAI is demonstrably tame compared to previous entries.

[nici2412]

I believe that's one of the reasons why the game has barely any interesting stories and feels so bland and shallow.. They are trying so hard to not offend anybody that the game suffers from it.

Can anyone imagine something like the Bloody Baron story in Dragon Age Inquition? I doubt they are capable of writing such a questline but aside from this  I also don't believe the current Bioware would want to.There are too many aspects which may trigger parts of their fanbase. If they would try, it  would probably end in a very onesided portrayal of the baron as the biggest evil ever, assumedly controlled by Red Lyrium and Anna as the poor and innocent vicitm. The goal would be to kill the baron in the end because he deserves it, considering he is the biggest evil ever.

I honestly can't believe how much Bioware changed since Origins, which had a lot of great little stories.

[FKA_Servo]

And get rid of that politically correct nonsense... it only kills depth

Very much this. It isn't even a matter of opinion. DAI is demonstrably tame compared to previous entries.

And this is demonstrably untrue, though I'll grant that you do need to dig for it more this time around. The codex entries and war table outcomes are frequently anything but tame. There is some very troubling stuff in there.

Even in the past games, the darkest stuff was strictly inferred as opposed to flat out shown most of the time.

[Elhanan]

And this is demonstrably untrue, though I'll grant that you do need to dig for it more this time around. The codex entries and war table outcomes are frequently anything but tame. There is some very troubling stuff in there.

Even in the past games, the darkest stuff was strictly inferred as opposed to flat out shown most of the time.

Not to mention all the nonsensical things about being PC. The varied topics are well written and differ on viewpoints, IMO.

[Gwydden]

And this is demonstrably untrue, though I'll grant that you do need to dig for it more this time around. The codex entries and war table outcomes are frequently anything but tame. There is some very troubling stuff in there.

True, but I could swear I've heard something about showing and not telling somewhere? 

 

Even in the past games, the darkest stuff was strictly inferred as opposed to flat out shown most of the time.

I beg to differ. DA was never all that dark, but it certainly had a very grayish tint to it. Just look at the origin stories, the first two or three hours of the first game, the way we are introduced to the world. They all had some pretty dark stuff — murder, rape, betrayal, abuse, poverty, lost of status, friends and relatives...

[AmberDragon]

And this is demonstrably untrue, though I'll grant that you do need to dig for it more this time around. The codex entries and war table outcomes are frequently anything but tame. There is some very troubling stuff in there.

Even in the past games, the darkest stuff was strictly inferred as opposed to flat out shown most of the time.

The thing is it should not be left to the war table missions and codex entries, it should be something the player can experience rather than them having to headcannon it! Some of those war table missions looked quite good and looked fun to do, but while you sent minions to do those your stuck with gathering freaking ram meat, finding blankets and finding shards!

 

If I want to read about missions I'll read a book, I want to experience them in a game and I want the outcomes to mean something! If I decide to not fetch ram meat or blankets I want to go back and see the people looking worse for wear or dead not all sitting around looking fat, happy and warm!

 

I liked DAI but it should have been so much better than it was, it was a huge disappointment to me, The Witcher 3 shows how it should have been done, like it or not Bioware dropped the ball. As for the flipping mmo style fetch quests, they need to go and so does the idea of people having to play multiplayer to get single player stuff. DAI is the first game by Bioware that I have felt is not worth me buying the dlc (and I have all the games and dlc from Baldurs Gate to DA2 and ME3) and that I have felt the dlc is dramatically over priced. I hope they get back on form for DA4 but I suspect it will be even worse because they keep proving all they want is a large amount of money for very little substance.

[Xetykins]

And this is demonstrably untrue, though I'll grant that you do need to dig for it more this time around. The codex entries and war table outcomes are frequently anything but tame. There is some very troubling stuff in there.
Even in the past games, the darkest stuff was strictly inferred as opposed to flat out shown most of the time.

Oh I really don't about that. Killing connor by your hand or let his mother do it is inferred? That's just one example of many.

Again you're talking about codexes and war tables that you do not get to see and act upon. You just send your minions and done. IF you're lucky there might be a chain mission of again you don't see. I think that is the major gripe of the disgruntled fans. Specially when there are tons of really cool war table missions that would have been epic to do but sadly never get to experience. One of the quests in the that would have been very cool to do was the wardens.


And Zev's

[In Exile]

Oh I really don't about that. Killing connor by your hand or let his mother do it is inferred? That's just one example of many.

Again you're talking about codexes and war tables that you do not get to see and act upon. You just send your minions and done. IF you're lucky there might be a chain mission of again you don't see. I think that is the major gripe of the disgruntled fans. Specially when there are tons of really cool war table missions that would have been epic to do but sadly never get to see.

 

But people don't really talk about the Connor choice as proof of DA:O being dark. They really talk about the body horror, and the darkspawn-oriented body horror imagery (hence Hespith always coming up). DA:I did have body horror with the red lyrium (being turned to stone sounds awful) but they never showed it.

[line_genrou]

The biggest problem with DAI story telling is that they don't show the player the awful stuff happening. We just read about it sometimes. I want to see what the heck is going on in Thedas! I want to see orphans, violence, dispair, chaos. Make me care for my role as the savior of the world, for f sake. Don't keep me out of the world.

[Xetykins]

But people don't really talk about the Connor choice as proof of DA:O being dark. They really talk about the body horror, and the darkspawn-oriented body horror imagery (hence Hespith always coming up). DA:I did have body horror with the red lyrium (being turned to stone sounds awful) but they never showed it.

That's why i said one of the many But I used connor because it was the darkest for me personally because it involves children.
Second to that was the City Elf with all the poverty, squalor violence against women during the wedding etc. Aside from the dalish and mage "I" found the rest of the origins quite dark. Not as dark as TW3 but hellovalot darker than DAI. But I also found Hespith's fate very dark too specially her chant. Gordang, I totally freaked out when I first heard the chant.

And I dont think they mean body horror either when they mention Hespith, but the way she was turned and the way she chanted of how she witnessed all the horrors of what the darkspawn did to their women and what they fed them for them to become brood mommy. It's a pretty graphic chant.

[Gwydden]

But people don't really talk about the Connor choice as proof of DA:O being dark. They really talk about the body horror, and the darkspawn-oriented body horror imagery (hence Hespith always coming up). DA:I did have body horror with the red lyrium (being turned to stone sounds awful) but they never showed it.

I don't know who "people" are, but when I talk about DAO being 'dark' I'm certainly not referring to the body horror, and I've never gotten the impression that's what most people mean either when they talk about DAI being rather tame.

 

For example, the dwarf commoner origin was a personal favorite of mine. Your family's dirt poor, everyone treats you like crap, you're forced to be a thug and your sister into prostitution, your mother's a drunk... That's a pretty heartfelt depiction of poverty in a rigid caste system, and I've never seen DAI come anywhere near it. And the dwarf commoner is hardly unique in that. Human noble, city elf, and dwarf noble were also pretty heavy in their content. Dalish elf and mage were the tamest, and they still went farther than most of DAI dares to.

[FKA_Servo]

True, but I could swear I've heard something about showing and not telling somewhere?

I beg to differ. DA was never all that dark, but it certainly had a very grayish tint to it. Just look at the origin stories, the first two or three hours of the first game, the way we are introduced to the world. They all had some pretty dark stuff — murder, rape, betrayal, abuse, poverty, lost of status, friends and relatives...

I've heard the same thing, but that's a different argument, strictly speaking.

I'm not saying you're wrong about DAO, but even there, the most terrifying reveal in there (precisely how brood mothers come about) is mostly left to your imagination.

[Xetykins]

I've heard the same thing, but that's a different argument, strictly speaking.
I'm not saying you're wrong about DAO, but even there, the most terrifying reveal in there (precisely how brood mothers come about) is mostly left to your imagination.

I think you need to play the game again to refresh I had to do that with DA2 as well

[Gwydden]

I've heard the same thing, but that's a different argument, strictly speaking.

I'm not saying you're wrong about DAO, but even there, the most terrifying reveal in there (precisely how brood mothers come about) is mostly left to your imagination.

It might be a different argument, but that's the one I'm having 

 

It's not the lack of terrifying monstrosities I take issue with but what I've mentioned above.

[In Exile]

I don't know who "people" are, but when I talk about DAO being 'dark' I'm certainly not referring to the body horror, and I've never gotten the impression that's what most people mean either when they talk about DAI being rather tame.

 

For example, the dwarf commoner origin was a personal favorite of mine. Your family's dirt poor, everyone treats you like crap, you're forced to be a thug and your sister into prostitution, your mother's a drunk... That's a pretty heartfelt depiction of poverty in a rigid caste system, and I've never seen DAI come anywhere near it. And the dwarf commoner is hardly unique in that. Human noble, city elf, and dwarf noble were also pretty heavy in their content. Dalish elf and mage were the tamest, and they still went farther than most of DAI dares to.

 

People being a general reference to the people on this forum I've seen post about DA:O being dark. I appreciate that you (and Xetykins) feel that DAO had other 'dark' content in terms of portrayals of poverty or social injustice. I personally wouldn't label that as 'dark' vs. DA:I being 'light' (or whatever the counter-term would be), because I see DA:O as more the default portrayal and DA:I moving away from it (largely because DA:I is all about people in power, and DA:O isn't).

 

 

That's why i said one of the many But I used connor because it was the darkest for me personally because it involves children.
Second to that was the City Elf with all the poverty, squalor violence against women during the wedding etc. Aside from the dalish and mage "I" found the rest of the origins quite dark. Not as dark as TW3 but hellovalot darker than DAI. But I also found Hespith's fate very dark too specially her chant. Gordang, I totally freaked out when I first heard the chant.

And I dont think they mean body horror either when they mention Hespith, but the way she was turned and the way she chanted of how she witnessed all the horrors of what the darkspawn did to their women and what they fed them for them to become brood mommy. It's a pretty graphic chant.

 

As I say above, DA:I portrays, ultimately, rich people. The Inquisition is rich and powerful - even at the start. You get NPCs more from the bottom rung of society like Sera, but we never see it.

 

Still, I think it's really notable that when we're talking about DA:O's darkness, we're talking about origin stories. Your examples go to the CE and HR origins. Gwydden talks about the DC origin. But what about the game itself?

 

The origins are brilliant, IMO, but they're very much not the kind of writing DA:O then focuses on for the rest of the game. Honestly, I think they're the product of the fact that Bioware was completely free from writing their usual B-movie epic plots, much like how ME2's small vignette missions were good because they were bogged down by the B-movie main plot.