657 réponses à ce sujet

[robertthebard]

Thank you, sincerely, for answering.  What you've said seems like a reasonable explanation for the existence of an audience for that gut-punch ending.  A masochistic fantasy experience is available in Iron Bull, and once players figure out what the character is about, they have the choice to avoid him entirely if that's not their gig.
 
Until players figure out what the character is about, and thus have that choice you talk about, naturally some will get an unwitting experience that is opposed to their fantasy fulfillment and response will range from dissatisfaction to anger, disappointment or disenchantment (i.e. OP).

I think that's what the issue is though: People had an expectation that things would work out a certain way, and then, BOOM, it didn't. I think the worst part of this is that they expect that even if they let the Chargers die, or ignore his personal quest altogether, thus cementing IB into the Qun, that he'll then betray the Qun because of the romance. Ultimately, there is no betrayal in that, other than a betrayal of expectations. That Thedas latched onto it and used it to deride the Inquisitor isn't surprising in the least bit, it's the nature of the beast. Ultimately, they're not "wrong", after all, that does happen. An Inquisitor that romances a Qun loyal IB was duped, mostly by themselves, into believing that they were more important to IB than the Qun.

[Ryzaki]

Yeah, I get that. But there are several responses where people act like the decision they made is the right one, and if you didn't make the same one, you don't think people are people, or you're just a heartless murderer.

 

There were consequences for making Bull Tal-Vashoth. He had to deal with assassins, for starters, and it's shown in several banters that he is plagued with self doubt now that he doesn't have the Qun. You also miss out on some missions, and a cool staff schematic, from what I've heard - I've never actually got to try that staff out. Maybe the game could have gone a bit further in depth on what the consequences were, but they were there.

 

Allying with the Qun didn't seem to have any real consequences in the main game as far as I could tell. Now it does, and I have no problem with that. It's just the 'if you chose X, it means you think Y' attitude that gets to me. It's perfectly valid to save or sacrifice the Chargers, and different people have different (valid) reasons for doing so.

 

Oh I don't know. There's some choices that don't even make sense for a douche character (I play douchebag characters and I can't even justify handing Fenris over to Danarius. he gives you goddamn 5 Sovereigns. At that point in the game you're rich. WTF. You'd get more than that off his corpse and get more work off Fenris grateful self. That's just stupid evil).

 

Yeah I had to farm for a tier 3 staff scheme because of that. God that was a pita. You don't want to know how long I sent reloading in Valammar. You really don't. The things I did because of Bull D:

 

Now on that we are perfectly agreed upon. They're perfectly valid reasons for both choices.

[Arvaarad]

And maybe that's why I have had a hard time understanding what I perceive as a lopsided distribution of negative consequence.

We haven't necessarily seen all the consequences yet. We're probably going to Tevinter in the next game. That place that's right next door to Par Vollen?

Sure, Bull betrays you. But there are now over one hundred people in Par Vollen who have had a good experience working with bas.

When their leaders give them propaganda about the brutish, uncivilized bas, some of those hundred will swallow it. But some of those hundred will tell them "no."

[denise12184]

Oh I don't know. There's some choices that don't even make sense for a douche character (I play douchebag characters and I can't even justify handing Fenris over to Danarius. he gives you goddamn 5 Sovereigns. At that point in the game you're rich. WTF. You'd get more than that off his corpse and get more work off Fenris grateful self. That's just stupid evil).

 

Yeah I had to farm for a tier 3 staff scheme because of that. God that was a pita. You don't want to know how long I sent reloading in Valammar. You really don't. The things I did because of Bull D:

 

Now on that we are perfectly agreed upon. They're perfectly valid reasons for both choices.

Er..yeah. I'd forgotten about that one. No, I have to say, I can't really see the justification in that.

[QueenCrow]

I think that's what the issue is though: People had an expectation that things would work out a certain way, and then, BOOM, it didn't. I think the worst part of this is that they expect that even if they let the Chargers die, or ignore his personal quest altogether, thus cementing IB into the Qun, that he'll then betray the Qun because of the romance. Ultimately, there is no betrayal in that, other than a betrayal of expectations. That Thedas latched onto it and used it to deride the Inquisitor isn't surprising in the least bit, it's the nature of the beast. Ultimately, they're not "wrong", after all, that does happen. An Inquisitor that romances a Qun loyal IB was duped, mostly by themselves, into believing that they were more important to IB than the Qun.

 

I hear you.  What it boils down to is not a matter of whether people should have had expectations that the game play would fulfill their fantasies or not - after all, Bioware people keep saying their goal is fantasy fulfillment.  What it boils down to is that some people are the type to go to movies and they enjoy themselves when they leave crying or enraged at the "bad guy" or unable to sleep at night because the horror flick they saw truly frightened them.  Those kinds of people go to those movies, read books, or play games because they like the emotional exercise, they've seen the previews and think they might get what they want for the ticket price and the few hours spent watching.

 

Other people don't enjoy that.  They get enough turmoil and angst in their real lives that it's the last thing they fantasize about.  It's the last thing they want in their leisure time.  Maybe the guy sitting at the console has been betrayed by someone he thought was his friend before and it's the antithesis to his fantasies.  Fantasy fulfillment for him is having people around he can rely upon.

 

It seems like Bioware is in a position of trying to fulfill fantasies when everyone has a different fantasy, and that's hard.  They're going to make some people happy by fulfilling a fantasy of angst and turmoil and emotional pain.  Those people are entitled to their happiness.  People who have a different idea of a good time will be unhappy with angst, turmoil and betrayal, and those people are justified in their feelings too.  And it doesn't do anything good to tell either group that their expectations are unjustified or unrealistic.

[sylvanaerie]

I don't think it makes anyone a horrible person. My the complaining about what happens is where I just start going "really really? We're complaining about consequences for our actions now?"

 

Also I'm not sure why people are bringing up "but if we got to know the soldiers we'd feel bad.

 

We have been introduced to the soldiers of the qunari. I'd still blow them up. On a whole they tend to talk about how they're gonna to invade, enlighten us, how we're dumb, how I can't fight (female), how I'm a thing (mage) like...screw thaaaaaaaaaaat.

 

This is my grief with the Qun's philosophy.  Before Inquisition's release I swore if IB was another Sten or Arishok I was going to off him in game if that was possible, or just not recruit him if it wasn't.  Even if I hadn't decided by the time I got to playing DA2 that most Qunari seem to be fanatical about their philosophy, Arvaraad's insistence on killing Hawke just because he 'might have become possessed when the Saarabas talked to him' kinda cinched for me the whole 'these idiots are lunatic fanatics' for me.  I don't even want to start on about how much I wanted to shove my foot up Sten's arse every time he started in on my female Surana about not being able to fight because she was a woman.  The clincher for his fate was when he talked about how the Qun treat mages.  After that, I started leaving his butt in the cage for the darkspawn. 

[denise12184]

I love Bioware, but they might wanna rethink the whole fantasy fulfillment thing. That is a goal that is destined to fail. As you said, it means different things to different people and there is absolutely no way to satisfy them all.

 

Personally, I want a good story. I don't need fantasy fulfillment -that's what my imagination is for, and it does a better job for me than any book, movie, game, etc. And that's fine. It's my fantasy, my imagination.

[Ryzaki]

This is my grief with the Qun's philosophy.  Before Inquisition's release I swore if IB was another Sten or Arishok I was going to off him in game if that was possible, or just not recruit him if it wasn't.  Even if I hadn't decided by the time I got to playing DA2 that most Qunari seem to be fanatical about their philosophy, Arvaraad's insistence on killing Hawke just because he 'might have become possessed when the Saarabas talked to him' kinda cinched for me the whole 'these idiots are lunatic fanatics' for me.  I don't even want to start on about how much I wanted to shove my foot up Sten's arse every time he started in on my female Surana about not being able to fight because she was a woman.  The clincher for his fate was when he talked about how the Qun treat mages.  After that, I started leaving his butt in the cage for the darkspawn. 

 

Yeah I wouldn't like Bull anywhere near if he was like the Arishok. Too loony. Even Fenris didn't go that far. And for a race that prides themselves on being so smart they sure do talk about their plans to invade their south a lot. It's just after a point.

 

 

I love Bioware, but they might wanna rethink the whole fantasy fulfillment thing. That is a goal that is destined to fail. As you said, it means different things to different people and there is absolutely no way to satisfy them all.

 

Personally, I want a good story. I don't need fantasy fulfillment -that's what my imagination is for, and it does a better job for me than any book, movie, game, etc. And that's fine. It's my fantasy, my imagination.

 

I don't mind the fantasy fulfillment myself I'd rather have a story that just makes sense however. I don't need to story bending just to pat the player on the back even when it doesn't make any damn sense though. If I make a foolish choice I want the game to kick me in the teeth for it.
 

*cough sparing fake Rachni Queen cough faking genophage with Wrex cough curing the genophage completely should've blown up too cough*

[robertthebard]

I hear you.  What it boils down to is not a matter of whether people should have had expectations that the game play would fulfill their fantasies or not - after all, Bioware people keep saying their goal is fantasy fulfillment.  What it boils down to is that some people are the type to go to movies and they enjoy themselves when they leave crying or enraged at the "bad guy" or unable to sleep at night because the horror flick they saw truly frightened them.  Those kinds of people go to those movies, read books, or play games because they like the emotional exercise, they've seen the previews and think they might get what they want for the ticket price and the few hours spent watching.
 
Other people don't enjoy that.  They get enough turmoil and angst in their real lives that it's the last thing they fantasize about.  It's the last thing they want in their leisure time.  Maybe the guy sitting at the console has been betrayed by someone he thought was his friend before and it's the antithesis to his fantasies.  Fantasy fulfillment for him is having people around he can rely upon.
 
It seems like Bioware is in a position of trying to fulfill fantasies when everyone has a different fantasy, and that's hard.  They're going to make some people happy by fulfilling a fantasy of angst and turmoil and emotional pain.  Those people are entitled to their happiness.  People who have a different idea of a good time will be unhappy with angst, turmoil and betrayal, and those people are justified in their feelings too.  And it doesn't do anything good to tell either group that their expectations are unjustified or unrealistic.

Here's my problem with this, overall: If "You can't please everyone, so just please me" is the philosophy, which side is chosen? There are romances that are flower sniffing happy endings, and there are romances that aren't. There are even some that can go either way, such as IB's. If you save the Chargers, none of this happens. However, having the expectation of encouraging IB to follow the Qun, except when you don't want him to is unrealistic, even in context with the game. He's either loyal to the Qun, or you, and you have the option to cement that loyalty one way or the other. All choices should have consequences, and they all do, it's just that positive consequences are more often referred to as rewards.

[QueenCrow]

Here's my problem with this, overall: If "You can't please everyone, so just please me" is the philosophy, which side is chosen? There are romances that are flower sniffing happy endings, and there are romances that aren't. There are even some that can go either way, such as IB's. If you save the Chargers, none of this happens. However, having the expectation of encouraging IB to follow the Qun, except when you don't want him to is unrealistic, even in context with the game. He's either loyal to the Qun, or you, and you have the option to cement that loyalty one way or the other. All choices should have consequences, and they all do, it's just that positive consequences are more often referred to as rewards.

 

You make a lot of points that are worthy of address, and I have to go to work in a few minutes, so I'm going to try and do your post justice in short time.  That's just an fyi

 

I agree that "you can't please everyone, so just please me" is an unproductive, and selfish, attitude and I don't think that's what anyone is saying.  What I've said is that you can't expect that everyone is going to be pleased with the way things go down with Bull and the people who aren't pleased have as much of a point as those who are tickled pink.

 

You're right that Bioware offers different experiences via different characters.  I can see their attempt to give every personality type something.  People who will lose respect for Iron Bull may foster respect for another character who shows fidelity to the cause in any situation.

 

In closing, to reduce Bull's essence to "he's either loyal to the Qun or loyal to you" is what shakes out in the ending, in my opinion.  I agree with you there.  And the simplicity is disappointing in my opinion, but perhaps Bioware is simply trying to deliver on some angst for those who like that kind of thing.   I see how one can reason that kind of thinking.  However, several people have already said that the personal quest, in which an alliance is dangled in front of the Inquisitor like a carrot, suggests the possibility that Bull can be loyal to you and loyal to the Qun when both Inquisition and Qun are working toward a greater goal/good.  That's how the quest begins.  That's how the relationship with Bull starts out.  The betrayal ending taints that possibility, but as Arvaarad suggested in a previous post, perhaps that possibility will be resurrected in future with another.

[denise12184]

I thought the game hammered over and over how having Bull loyal to both was impossible. The inquisitor is an individual, and the Qun is about the whole. The Qun looks on anyone not in the Qun with pity at best, poor creatures in need of enlightenment. Bas means 'thing' and anyone not qunari is bas. The alliance makes perfect sense when you consider that there is a giant hole in the sky that threatens everyone, and it turns out your character is the only one who can do anything about it. After that? Still bas, (even baslit-an has the root word in it) and now you have no purpose to them. I have to reiterate here that Bull was never loyal to the inquisitor or the inquisition. Never. You have the opportunity to change his mind, when there are people he cares about on the line, but up until that point, he is loyal to the Qun. A man can't serve two masters, and I really think that is the whole point of Bull's quest. 

[Nixou]

Oh I don't know. There's some choices that don't even make sense for a douche character (I play douchebag characters and I can't even justify handing Fenris over to Danarius. he gives you goddamn 5 Sovereigns. At that point in the game you're rich. WTF. You'd get more than that off his corpse and get more work off Fenris grateful self. That's just stupid evil).

 

 

Bioware always had that problem: selfish choices are often so stupid, so impractical, so harmful to the protagonist in the long run that selecting them they make little sense unless you're roleplaying a cognitively limited character.

 

***

 

I don't even want to start on about how much I wanted to shove my foot up Sten's arse every time he started in on my female Surana about not being able to fight because she was a woman

 

 

Too bad Origins didn't grant you the choice to answer "Sten, darling, which part of «I can crush your chest with a thought» do you need me to translate in Qunlat?"

 

Still, I prefer to get him out of his cage, first because leaving him here goes against my completionist reflexes, and second because I like to think that having to spend months traveling with and following orders from a most-certainly-not-Aqun-Athlok female Saarebas who loves to fight, immensely enjoys being in charge yet doesn't turn into a possessed abomination, makes completely baffling choices (yeah, let's go hiking in the mountains to find a dead woman's ashes supposed to heal an ailing nobleman while Darkspawn roam the land, let's put the whole save-the-world-quest on hold to go looking for your lost sword, sweetie) which somehow always end up with beneficial outcomes felt like an loooooong, harrowing mindfuck:

 

"Soooo: how was your mission down south?"

"The pastries are nice... Everything else makes no taarshidathing sense"

[RoughTumble]

In theory, if the devs hadn't made the decision to force an either-or situation, is it possible in anyones imagination for The Iron Bull to be loyal to the Qun and the Chargers?  Does anybody know how many pre-Inquisition years he spent doing that?  Or was he never loyal to the Chargers and always loyal to the Qun until Inky makes him Tal-Vashoth?

[Gervaise]

The Iron Bull appeared loyal to both the Qun and the Chargers because his loyalty had never been put to the test.   Throughout those previous years acting the part of a Tal-Vashoth was in fulfilment of his mission to spy out the south.   Even the majority of the Chargers didn't know he was a Qunari spy.   Krem says that only a few veteran Chargers (probably those few we meet) were aware of the situation.   Even so, Krem states in WoT2 that "I trust that man with my life", because Iron Bull seems torn between his duty to the Qun and the new life he has established for himself.    It is suggested that Iron Bull is trying to kid himself that his enjoyment of the Tal-Vashoth life is all part of his cover story as a spy and nothing more.     He admits to the Inquisitor that he doesn't like to think about what life would be like for the people he has met because for most of them, particularly the mages it would turn out badly if the Qun were to invade, which he certainly thinks will happen at some point in the future.    Nevertheless he makes it clear that he still considers himself a loyal member of the Qun.   

 

His bosses back at Par Vollen aren't so sure which is why I think the red lyrium run was as much a test of Bull as the Inquisitor.     That personal quest is the turning point for him.   What confuses people, I think, and makes them think he is loyal to the Inquisitor, is that his decision is based on what you order him to do rather than Bull deciding for himself.     If you order him to save the Chargers, that is true because you have severed his link to the Qun and there is no turning back for him.   However, if you order him to let them die, then you are pretty much confirming their philosophy that serving the cause is all that matters and his loyalty to the Qun is confirmed in his mind.    Having taken away the group of people who he had come to identify with over the previous several years, ordering him to sacrifice them for your cause (your alliance with the Qun), it should hardly come as a surprise when his loyalty to the Qun takes precedence at a later stage.

[Uirebhiril]

I suppose a lot of upset and confusion comes from people believing that if they are on your team they are automatically loyal to you. Every last member of the inner circle had their own agenda and reason for being there. Everyone wanted to see the hole in the sky closed, but working together to solve a mutual problem is not the same thing as being life-long friends. It's certainly valid to hate Bull for turning on you, but it's totally in keeping with his character if his loyalty to the Qun above all else is confirmed in his mind.

[RoughTumble]

@ Gervaise

 

Thanks.  That the whole alliance thing was just a ruse to test Inky and The Iron Bull didn't occur to me.  I guess we both passed LOL  I'll go ahead and plan on killing him then.  Nice of him to wait to make me kill him until I don't need him anymore.

[robertthebard]

You make a lot of points that are worthy of address, and I have to go to work in a few minutes, so I'm going to try and do your post justice in short time.  That's just an fyi
 
I agree that "you can't please everyone, so just please me" is an unproductive, and selfish, attitude and I don't think that's what anyone is saying.  What I've said is that you can't expect that everyone is going to be pleased with the way things go down with Bull and the people who aren't pleased have as much of a point as those who are tickled pink.
 
You're right that Bioware offers different experiences via different characters.  I can see their attempt to give every personality type something.  People who will lose respect for Iron Bull may foster respect for another character who shows fidelity to the cause in any situation.
 
In closing, to reduce Bull's essence to "he's either loyal to the Qun or loyal to you" is what shakes out in the ending, in my opinion.  I agree with you there.  And the simplicity is disappointing in my opinion, but perhaps Bioware is simply trying to deliver on some angst for those who like that kind of thing.   I see how one can reason that kind of thinking.  However, several people have already said that the personal quest, in which an alliance is dangled in front of the Inquisitor like a carrot, suggests the possibility that Bull can be loyal to you and loyal to the Qun when both Inquisition and Qun are working toward a greater goal/good.  That's how the quest begins.  That's how the relationship with Bull starts out.  The betrayal ending taints that possibility, but as Arvaarad suggested in a previous post, perhaps that possibility will be resurrected in future with another.

The reality is that you can't please everyone. No matter how this was handled, someone was going to be upset about it. There was at least one thread that insisted that IB must turn on you if you made him loyal to the Qun, for example, on this forum. That's the thing, for me, that I keep seeing, and someone else pointed it out after this post: here. We either cement his loyalty to the Qun by sacrificing the Chargers or ignoring his quest, or we cement his loyalty to us, by saving the people that he's become attached to, thus demonstrating that sometimes, the people closest to us are more important than political convenience.

[Dr. rotinaj]

Good point. Consequences for our actions is something that people always say they want more of. Now it's actually happening.

 

Yeah there's a common desire on the BSN to choose consequences rather than have choices with consequences.

[QueenCrow]

The reality is that you can't please everyone. No matter how this was handled, someone was going to be upset about it. There was at least one thread that insisted that IB must turn on you if you made him loyal to the Qun, for example, on this forum. That's the thing, for me, that I keep seeing, and someone else pointed it out after this post: here. We either cement his loyalty to the Qun by sacrificing the Chargers or ignoring his quest, or we cement his loyalty to us, by saving the people that he's become attached to, thus demonstrating that sometimes, the people closest to us are more important than political convenience.

 

Yes.  You're clear on your outline of what writers intended with the Iron Bull personal quest.  The clarity doesn't lessen my ability to empathize with people who were surprised and unhappy.  

 

We disagree regarding any demonstration that sometimes, the people closest to us are more important than doing a job that has to be done.  While I understand your point and will defend your right to choose and feel accordingly to your conscience, I (my Inquisitor) hired Bull to do a job.  He's a merc on the payroll, and I'm pretty clear that doesn't make him my friend.

 

I share opinion with my better half *points up to RoughTumble*  When Bull comes to face me in battle, I'll meet him and kill him.  Then, with another job to do - namely tracking down an overpowered elf with intention to burn the world in chaos- I'll consider using Qunari strength again to do what needs to be done.

 

Aside from my opinion and my view on things, I still understand and feel for the people who were not pleased with how the development worked out.  Perhaps saying "I understand and am sorry you're not happy" to them will help where saying something like "you had it coming" would not.  If not, it isn't for lack of trying.

[squirrely1]

Hey guys,  all this talk about the IB I wonder is it possible not to recruit him in the first place?  I know there are some companions you can choose not to recruit.  If that is the case with the IB I guess the whole betrayal scene would just obviously not play out, or maybe he shows up anyway and just tries to kill you. LOL  Obviously you know him if you talked to him initially but then choose not to recruit him if anyone would even try that.  

[sylvanaerie]

Hey guys,  all this talk about the IB I wonder is it possible not to recruit him in the first place?  I know there are some companions you can choose not to recruit.  If that is the case with the IB I guess the whole betrayal scene would just obviously not play out, or maybe he shows up anyway and just tries to kill you. LOL  Obviously you know him if you talked to him initially but then choose not to recruit him if anyone would even try that.  

I believe it is possible to not recruit him.  Or talk to him and still not recruit him.  It would even be in character.  Bull tells you he's a spy right up front.  That he will be sending reports back on what's going on.   Nothing like an 'honest liar' eh?  You can tell him "Don't send anything till you run it by Leliana and I want all your correspondence from them...but I never believed he would, at least not everything anyway. 

 

I am unsure if he turns up in that instance or not.

 

And does he pop in at that moment if he's going to fight you and isn't in your group at the time?  Or to refuse the female who orders him to attack you if he doesn't?  Like Zevran in the alley in Denerim?

[Tamyn]

I suppose a lot of upset and confusion comes from people believing that if they are on your team they are automatically loyal to you. Every last member of the inner circle had their own agenda and reason for being there. Everyone wanted to see the hole in the sky closed, but working together to solve a mutual problem is not the same thing as being life-long friends. It's certainly valid to hate Bull for turning on you, but it's totally in keeping with his character if his loyalty to the Qun above all else is confirmed in his mind.

 

I remember people getting mad at Zevran turning on them when they just left him in camp and never talked to him the whole game.

[leaguer of one]

I remember people getting mad at Zevran turning on them when they just left him in camp and never talked to him the whole game.

Same with Isabella.

[Tamyn]

Same with Isabella.

 

As much as I dislike Isabela, I dislike the qunari more, so I usually let her run away with the book or give her to them so she runs away with the book.

 

Bad enough I'm forced to let Tallis win.

[milkeye]

Until players figure out what the character is about, and thus have that choice you talk about, naturally some will get an unwitting experience that is opposed to their fantasy fulfillment and response will range from dissatisfaction to anger, disappointment or disenchantment (i.e. OP).

 

 

It seems like Bioware is in a position of trying to fulfill fantasies when everyone has a different fantasy, and that's hard.  They're going to make some people happy by fulfilling a fantasy of angst and turmoil and emotional pain.  Those people are entitled to their happiness.  People who have a different idea of a good time will be unhappy with angst, turmoil and betrayal, and those people are justified in their feelings too.  And it doesn't do anything good to tell either group that their expectations are unjustified or unrealistic.

 

You make some good points, but it should be remembered that Bull doesn't betray every player. For a great many people, Bull remains loving and devoutly loyal to the end, and is still alive and helping the Inquisitor when the credits roll. To characterize him primarily as a "masochistic fantasy experience" does him a disservice, because it doesn't take into account his equally poignant ability to fulfill the tender, joyful fantasies many crave. In one world state he may be a back-stabbing lover/friend, but in another he would die before betraying his lover/friend. There have been quite a few threads outright declaring Bull a horrible betrayer, but sadly we don't see many threads discussing his devotion and allegiance, which tends to then turn something that is indefinite into something absolute in people's minds. 

 

I do think that many people have empathy for those who were unwillingly misled - I know I certainly do. I'm not sure it's fair to imply that everyone with a differing opinion is unsympathetic, though. I think perhaps where the heated feelings come in is in cases of Bull's betrayal being blamed on everything and anything - especially the character himself - when, all emotions and theorizing aside - it was ultimately the result of a player decision. We can debate things like nebulous writing, canonical minutiae, or character (mis)development, but in the very end it boils down to the player. It just seems that in leu of accepting some responsibility, people are lashing out in their dissatisfaction and disappointment, and the character of Bull itself is taking an unwarranted beating, in my opinion. Again, I completely understand the upset. I feel you. It's a gutting, crap ending. But I also think that it is an ending that makes sense based on Bull's story. And it's only one half of the story.