125 réponses à ce sujet

[vbibbi]

Because it was written for him/her, from Varric's involvement, Corypheus, Cassandra searching for him in 2. I mean Cassandra opens DA2, she was determined to find him, and much of Inquisition was spent explaining why it didn't happen. If you don't see how much story was recycled then I guess we don't have much to talk about here.
 
Origin was in limbo for quite long, they developed it on 2 engines (started on an updated Aurora, then moved to Eclipse), plus they had to create the entire lore for the series. And before the buyout they had serious financial problems. So yes, the bulk of development was done in 3 years. DA2 did get rushed, but it gets really blown out of proportion. Both Origins, and Inquisition needed time to program the mechanics, DA2 reused mostly DAO tech, including the engine, which basically got a slight refresh. For the same reason Fallout Nev Vegas had a much shorter dev cycle than 3 (around 1.5y). Considering that Frostbite is entirely new tech (previous engines had at least some shared familiarity), they did all of the work for Inquisition really fast.
 
And DA2 DLC were not canceled, because 'they realized their mistake,' but because of the critical feedback. The (way over the top) response caused them to distance themselves as much from 2 as they could (including dropping the stylized III). But anyway, this is off topic.
 
The point remains that a lot of people find DA2's companions, main story, and antagonists stronger than what we got in DAI.

Yeah my assumption is that the DLC would have dealt with the mage-templar war (though whether it's resolved or not is hard to tell) and the Temple of Mythal. We know that ToM was definitely from the DLC, so maybe that played out mostly the same, with Merrill as Morrigan. It's too bad this didn't happen for many reasons, but most relevant is that now the full story planned for DA3 is split between DAI and DA4. I think the Solas story is going to be weakened in DA4 by having it split from its beginning in DAI and Trespasser.
 

Again, being different isn't automatically better. Origins for instance took that so-called "same and tired" approach and made a truly effective RPG experience with it. It was a darker reconstructive take on fantasy stories with heavy influences from high, low, dark and gothic fantasy to make its own interesting take. They also took their time with making Origins as good as it can be and it's better for it even after 7 years.

Very true, different doesn't equal better. But in this case, I would argue that different is at least good to venture past the tired setting of most fantasy RPGs now. Less epic save the world stories and cliched villains, more of a personal story with human antagonists.
 

DA2 has good ideas and could have been a great game with more time. With proper development time, DA2 would indeed be worthy of being lauded for successfully breaking the mold much like the Witcher series. But not only was it rushed, it also had clear execution issues with how to get its theme and angle across. The main ones being turning the Mage-Templar Conflict from a grey-grey conflict into a black-black crazy fest and Lots of instances where player agency (the primary means by which the player engages the story/game) is artificially and obviously restricted for the sake of forced drama.

I agree, the mages and templars were all insane and would have benefited from more Thrasks or Bethanys. And unfortunately I don't think more development time would have fixed this, I think this was the plan for Bio all along. They can be very heavy handed and simplistic in their morality.
 

Primary examples of restricted player agency being the fates of Carver and Bethany and having a choice between two unlikable factions being forced on you when there's no reason why you shouldn't be able to either leave or flip off both sides and protect Kirkwall above mages and templars.

I wish we had had a longer prologue, starting in Lothering before the Blight, so that we could interact with our family. Then we would get to know our siblings before one of them dies, to make it more affecting. As it is, we barely know either of them when we start the game so there's no real emotional connection by the five minute mark when one dies.

I also wish Act 3 hadn't been so rushed, as I'd like to hope there would have been more options for us. Or have our choices matter, so that if we were pro-mage most of the game, none of the mages use blood magic in the final battle. Orsino doesn't turn into the harvester, no matter whom we side with. If we're pro-templar most of the game, more mages resort to blood magic, but the templar ranks have decreased from defectors and deserters due to the increasingly harsh laws Meredith enacts. We can still be railroaded into the two endings, but there's a way to still incorporate our choices.
 

Here's another example, why put in the Red Lyrium idol if it was irrelevant anyway? Meredith was already overstepping her bounds and oppressing mages with her paranoia, so why bother revealing that she had the Red Lyrium idol all along? She would have been stronger if the red lyrium idol wasn't influencing her. Instead, the heavy implication with its surprise reveal is that the red lyrium idol made her go crazy as it did to Bartrand. Take a look at the Arishok, he did everything of his own free will and was clearly the most memorable character in the game. He's a stronger character because his agency isn't manipulated by a barely explained magic item that made him crazy. What makes Meredith's situation especially sad is that she was already a good antagonist without the lyrium idol, why not let her stand alone on her own two feet?

Yeah, I think the red lyrium was more of foreshadowing for future games than necessary for the final fight. I get that Bio wanted to have a superpowered boss as the end fight, but couldn't Meredith just be a super templar and have a lot of magic nullifying powers? Especially since red lyrium in DAI has nowhere the same properties as living statues or super jumping. 
 

As for Corypheus, I agree that the developers didn't do the man justice. However, he wasn't pointless and empty. He had a strong connection to the central theme of the game regarding Faith and Order. He has connections to the Blight, a key tenet of Dragon Age since the first game. From what little we do see of him, he does have an interesting character motivation that fleshes him out as more than just a power-hungry madman. This was a devout high priest who climbed the ladder to heaven, found out that heaven was filled with evil, got corrupted by evil, didn't find his god, and was cast down to earth as a monster.
 
So he decides to correct the problem of the missing god by becoming a god himself. What makes the missed opportunities with Corypheus more disappointing is that so much more could have been done with him. There was clear potential, but much like with DA2 a lot of it wasn't realized.

 
Yeah he had a lot of potential. Apart from his lack of screen time and always losing after Haven, what didn't work is that his goals were very generic villain: become a god and rule the world. Yes, his motivation was interesting, his god abandoned him or never existed, and when he followed what he thought were his god's commands, he turned into a monster and fell from heaven.

But his plan...made no sense. So he resented becoming a darkspawn, yet constantly used red lyrium, a Blight tainted substance, to fuel his armies. He didn't need to know that it had the Blight, but it's obvious that red lyrium is bad news to the world. Did he just assume once he was a god he could clean up all the lyrium lying around? From the sound of the researcher in the Empire du Lion keep, red lyrium is infecting insects and worms in the ground and spreading that way; it's almost impossible to contain once it's leaked.

And why did he think that reaching the Black City would make him a god? Last time he was there it didn't work out so well, and he says he has no memories of his time there, so it's not like he knew there was some power he could use to become a god. And why the need to be a "god" anyway? He's already immortal and has significant magical power and a fanatical army behind him. Why does he need to bother entering the Fade when he could probably conquer Thedas through mundane means?

Yeah it's all about his pride and wanting to have the title of god. But instead of the Elder One, he could have the Venatori call him the God Imperator or such.

It would have been more interesting if he wanted to return to the Black City to bring back proof that the Maker's throne was empty; find some way of revealing to the world what was in the Fade and disillusion their core beliefs. Then, he would be the closest thing left to a god and the faithless would flock to him. This is a stronger connection to the themes of faith and belief than just stopping a would-be god, IMO.
 

The approach and what worked in Origins is arguable. For me anything outside of the core plot of darkspawn and the archdemon felt stronger. Orzamar was better. Nature of the Beast was way more memorable than the main plot. Good quests that didn't really do much with the main plot, but with world building were far better than the big bad approach. I couldn't enjoy DAO until it started branching away.

Yeah, the actual Blight was pretty generic and not that interesting. Orzammar was better, the political struggle of the Landsmeet was better, the idea of the Fade and demons was better (although the quest is frustrating after the first play through). The mage origin is by no means my favorite one, but one of my favorite parts of the game is when the mage goes through the harrowing and realizes that who he thought was a mage's spirit turns out to be a pride demon. That scene gave me chills in its presentation.
 
The only really interesting thing about the Blight was the broodmother reveal. Awakening does add some interesting information, but it's a bit contradictory and so far hasn't gone anywhere.

[Biotic Apostate]

Yeah my assumption is that the DLC would have dealt with the mage-templar war (though whether it's resolved or not is hard to tell) and the Temple of Mythal. We know that ToM was definitely from the DLC, so maybe that played out mostly the same, with Merrill as Morrigan. It's too bad this didn't happen for many reasons, but most relevant is that now the full story planned for DA3 is split between DAI and DA4. I think the Solas story is going to be weakened in DA4 by having it split from its beginning in DAI and Trespasser.

Oh yeah, thanks for reminding me - Merrill! Her story would have a great conclusion with her eluvian knowledge paying off after all of these years. DA4 so far points to having a "Inquisition part 2" feeling. If the DLC had seen the light, we would have a completely different situation right now. Probably 1/3 of DAI + Trespasser + a part of DA4 would have been condensed into DA3.

 

Yeah, the actual Blight was pretty generic and not that interesting. Orzammar was better, the political struggle of the Landsmeet was better, the idea of the Fade and demons was better (although the quest is frustrating after the first play through). The mage origin is by no means my favorite one, but one of my favorite parts of the game is when the mage goes through the harrowing and realizes that who he thought was a mage's spirit turns out to be a pride demon. That scene gave me chills in its presentation.
 
The only really interesting thing about the Blight was the broodmother reveal. Awakening does add some interesting information, but it's a bit contradictory and so far hasn't gone anywhere.

Honestly, if it wasn't the first game in the series, and didn't offer so much new information, it would turn out pretty weak. The "gather your forces for a final strike" idea has been done in 4 out of 6 recent BW games (DAO, DAI, ME2, ME3). It's getting tired already. I loved the elf storyline, and Orzamar. And even though the fade was exhausting, it offered so much regarding story. And yeah, the reveal was great.

I'm glad we have the blight behind us, because it's the laziest enemy ever - a faceless, ruthless horde of monsters without any drive other than "kill."

[vbibbi]

Oh yeah, thanks for reminding me - Merrill! Her story would have a great conclusion with her eluvian knowledge paying off after all of these years. DA4 so far points to having a "Inquisition part 2" feeling. If the DLC had seen the light, we would have a completely different situation right now. Probably 1/3 of DAI + Trespasser + a part of DA4 would have been condensed into DA3.
 
Honestly, if it wasn't the first game in the series, and didn't offer so much new information, it would turn out pretty weak. The "gather your forces for a final strike" idea has been done in 4 out of 6 recent BW games (DAO, DAI, ME2, ME3). It's getting tired already. I loved the elf storyline, and Orzamar. And even though the fade was exhausting, it offered so much regarding story. And yeah, the reveal was great.
I'm glad we have the blight behind us, because it's the laziest enemy ever - a faceless, ruthless horde of monsters without any drive other than "kill."

Bio likes to reuse certain story mechanics, such as starting in an area which will be destroyed soon after we leave, going to four diverse locations to find the macguffin, then going to the final zone. Maybe it's just because I've recently played KOTOR. And ME1.

[Biotic Apostate]

Bio likes to reuse certain story mechanics, such as starting in an area which will be destroyed soon after we leave, going to four diverse locations to find the macguffin, then going to the final zone. Maybe it's just because I've recently played KOTOR. And ME1.

BW is good at telling stories and building worlds, but they seriously need a new skeleton for their future narratives. Still not as bad as Bethesda with Fallout (be with a family member in a vault, search for them when they leave it, go through a brain reading segment, find them and discover their motives, agree or disagree with them, and chose one of the factions to complete the main quest with).

[Catilina]

Cullen: "Why hello, robed, staff-wielding, fireball-throwing citizen. If you happen to see any mages around, please direct me to them."

 

 

Let's clarify: Hawke don't use magic on Kirkwall' public street, and at templars. (Yes, he use, for the game mechanism, but not according to the story.) It also demonstrates some scenes, for example this (3:15):

 

//indavideo.hu/video/DA2_Qunari_scene

[Addictress]

Except the weight of the conflict is lost because its a mindless flanderization of itself. Everyone is crazy and corrupt, so why be invested?

Letting the player choose Hawke's role would be better for the story because it is Hawke's story. The last thing that you want to do to a hero is have them be an accessory to their own story. Otherwise, why are we watching this guy's story when someone else clearly had more influence.

No, this is not my cup of tea because I know BW can do much better. I've seen them do better before with just about every game that they released before DA2. Unfortunately, BW was the one who wanted to have its cake and eat it. They wanted to make an epic story and have Hawke as a byronic hero struggling against odds that he can't defeat. But with the inherent purpose of an RPG game and the already established scope of both the setting and the hero of Hawke, you can't suddenly make him powerless just for the sake of the plot. Of course he can't affect everything, but what he should be able to affect should be of significance. Otherwise, Hawke is just pointless as both a PC and as the main hero.

The story cannot expect me to believe that Meredith really can intimidate and force Hawke to do anything after he's spent the course of 7 years defeating Qunari; Dragons; Rock Biters; Demons; Abominations; Templars; Darkspawn; Scoundrels; Assassins; Ancient Magisters; and more. Including potentially defeating the Arishok, one of the strongest Qunari alive, single-handedly. There is literally nothing forcing Hawke to bend to her will or to the contrived transparent contrivance of that situation apart from the plot.

In the Witcher series, the scope is managed to where its clear that Gerault has clear limits. He can't do everything and he has to work within the bounds that he can as a Witcher and an outcast. Even within those bounds, Gerault's actions still have a sense of meaning to them because player agency is allowed to function appropriately within that scope. Hence why Witcher 2 greatly succeeds where DA2 failed.

With DA2, you can't go from having Hawke slay a High Dragon to suddenly being forced to choose between crazy mages and crazy templars. Especially if the game's already established that Hawke is strong enough to wipe out small armies of either faction. The scope has already been set to where if Meredith attacked Hawke at that key moment, Hawke would win. And he wouldn't be fighting Meredith alone. He'd have the City Guard with him, sympathetic/moderate mages and templars like Cullen, and other allies from the underworld and various factions that he's worked with for the past few years. He'd also have his stalwart and capable companions with him. Not to mention that Meredith would also be fighting against the mages who wouldn't side with her. It would be a three way battle between the Mages, Templars and Hawke's allies. And since everything is meant to end the same anyway with the Mage-Templar war starting, why not have Hawke come to that end on his own terms?

As I said before, it would be a more effective tragedy if Hawke used all of his unrestricted agency to try and save Kirkwall from this unraveling situation, but failed despite his best and most honest efforts. It also be a good twist if Hawke could just leave and baffle Cassandra that the so-called Hero would abandon Kirkwall. It would leave an interesting question of whether Hawke is a coward or smart for leaving a hopeless situation? Instead, we're forced to partake in a dark vs dark conflict that's been flanderized into a parody of itself and there's no reason to care for either side.

Also, take a look at the Arishok situation. That situation is everything that Last Straw wasn't. You weren't forced to fight the Arishok in a 1-on-1 fight, you had other options. You could gang rush the Arishok and kill him on your own terms or if your influence with Isabella was strong enough, you could potentially hand over Isabella and avoid further bloodshed. Last Straw should have been similar to this dynamic and would have left the game to end on a much stronger note.

So in short, the powerless hero archetype doesn't work for the type of RPG that Dragon Age is because the scope and design has no purpose for powerless heroes. And even a byronic hero actually has to have room to act and breath in their struggles rather than be contrived to stand still for the convenience of the plot. If you want an example of how to do a byronic hero correctly and well, look up Kou Uraki from Gundam: Stardust Memory and Guts from Berserk. Their story is truly tragic because they did everything in their power, but failed due to circumstances beyond their control. Natural circumstances emerging from their world and other characters rather than invisible strings created from plot contrivance and artificial narrative manipulation.

"Everyone is crazy and corrupt, so why be invested?"

You're really just at odds with the type of theatricality used to express the story. It's like...theater. It's not under-expressed and subtle like a Chris Nolan film.

This isn't a mistake, it's a stylistic choice, which is subjectively appreciated by some and might irk others. For me, I like this style and I'm able to feel the weight of the story in spite of the heightened expressiveness.

[Addictress]

I see what you mean, about slaying a high dragon then being limited in the final battle. Could have a three-way battle. I don't know, I felt more...dramatic when I had to pick a side. I'd roll my eyes at the stupidity if Hawke elected to be a "better than thou" third party who thinks they're better than either side. In a way it would disrespect all the characters and everything if you had a third party.

[Catilina]

"Everyone is crazy and corrupt, so why be invested?"

You're really just at odds with the type of theatricality used to express the story. It's like...theater. It's not under-expressed and subtle like a Chris Nolan film.

This isn't a mistake, it's a stylistic choice, which is subjectively appreciated by some and might irk others. For me, I like this style and I'm able to feel the weight of the story in spite of the heightened expressiveness.

Absolutly agree!

[Addictress]

My only gripe with Bioware right now is that their formula is getting way old - you must, must recruit a bunch of companions for a final battle. Even when it doesn't really make sense for the story at hand.

 

It worked perfectly with Mass Effect 2.  It was an infiltration operation, a suicide mission, so you needed 1. a small team 2. needed to investigate and tie up personal interests for everyone in that team 3. the duress of the mission meant that you got really close with your team members.

 

It also worked in Dragon Age 2, because you're in a city, made some friends because of specific expeditions or things you've done in the past, and met people through those experiences, like in real life. And they're not necessarily under your command, they're just tagging along because you're interesting, they like adventure, and you're constantly just...hanging out and doing things in the city. They even have their own homes in the city and their own lives, so it works out like that.

 

Inquisition insulted this experience by having these specific team mates take up prominent roles in the Skyhold castle... for what? Blackwall is treated like a major asset. Why would I have three companions with me at all times when the majority of quests and tasks I'm setting out to do should be performed by an entire army? It's a goddam holy war spanning multiple nations, and I'm assaulting a fortified keep with just myself and three buddies? That's ridiculously OP and also ignores the scale of the operations you're conducting.

 

Dragon Age Origins made sense because by nature of the story, you're one of two surviving Grey Wardens and only Grey Wardens have the treaties and power to get a bunch of people together. Then at the final battle, you SEE those factions with you - you see an entire Dalish army spawn out there, you see a whole army of golems come out if you got those.

[ShadowLordXII]

"Everyone is crazy and corrupt, so why be invested?"

You're really just at odds with the type of theatricality used to express the story. It's like...theater. It's not under-expressed and subtle like a Chris Nolan film.

This isn't a mistake, it's a stylistic choice, which is subjectively appreciated by some and might irk others. For me, I like this style and I'm able to feel the weight of the story in spite of the heightened expressiveness.

 

Its a stylistic choice that's at odds with the execution and scope that BW implemented. There's a way to make it work and DA2 didn't go that way.If you like it then no one's stopping you, but those of us who see the game's flaws and issues aren't bashing the game because "we don't get".

 

For instance, the mage templar dynamic is much better in Origins because both sides still have elements of sympathy and humanity to them. Sure, there's the negative stuff like blood mages, abominations and demons for mages and tranquility, restrictive attitudes, and paranoia for templars. However, both sides had moderates and rationally minded individuals who were simply doing what they thought was right. Gregeor didn't want to invoke the Right of Annulment, but the situation was getting really dire and thus, he sent word for the sake of the people outside of the tower. Irving and Wynne are responsible mages who were struggling to protect them home from the corrupt mages. Even the blood mages were a little sympathetic once you hear their side of things.

 

The player was allowed to make a few natural choices on their own terms and could make an informed decision based on our character's morals and beliefs. The Warden could therefore save the non-rebelling mages; save the mages, but turn them over to the templars; or kill all of the mages rather they're blood mages or not. Which one is the right choice? That's going to depend on your Warden and maybe there is no right choice. But these are real choices with real interest behind them.

 

Feels dramatic for you? Cool. However, I saw this as a prime example of forced drama which undermined any real sense of tension. You know what? What's wrong with Hawke saying that he's standing above the conflict and engaging it on his own terms? That would demonstrate real strength because he won't be bullied by non-sequitors or the same madness that's infected both sides. Hence, its more dramatic and tragic when he struggles against this madness and only gains a pyrrhic victory at best with the Mage-Templar war still enveloping Thedas. Plus, Kirkwall is still ruined despite his efforts to protect it and both factions mark Hawke as their enemy with some believing that he sided with the templars and others believing that he's working with mages.

 

The above would have been much better. You still get the intended affect, you still get a lot of drama, you still get a good set-up for the next game, and all without crippling player agency and putting a barrier of apathy between the player and the story.

 

We get DA2 and what it was trying to do. But that doesn't excuse it from stumbling or from being the weakest BW game ever released. Maybe if the game wasn't rushed, it would have had more time to refine its ideas and intentions into something more worthwhile. But as is, it isn't brilliant despite its best efforts. The story structure has a rushed Prologue that keeps changing its tone every 2 minutes; a decent 1st Act to set up the characters and let the setting breathe; an excellent 2nd Act where the game's story peaks; and then Act 3 is where everything falls flat on its face and abruptly ends without any true closure.

[ComedicSociopathy]

Can't really agree with Dragon Age 2 being the best written story since my experience with and it's companion characters was basically...

 

 

This. 

[ComedicSociopathy]

My only gripe with Bioware right now is that their formula is getting way old - you must, must recruit a bunch of companions for a final battle. Even when it doesn't really make sense for the story at hand.

 

It worked perfectly with Mass Effect 2.  It was an infiltration operation, a suicide mission, so you needed 1. a small team 2. needed to investigate and tie up personal interests for everyone in that team 3. the duress of the mission meant that you got really close with your team members.

 

It also worked in Dragon Age 2, because you're in a city, made some friends because of specific expeditions or things you've done in the past, and met people through those experiences, like in real life. And they're not necessarily under your command, they're just tagging along because you're interesting, they like adventure, and you're constantly just...hanging out and doing things in the city. They even have their own homes in the city and their own lives, so it works out like that.

 

Inquisition insulted this experience by having these specific team mates take up prominent roles in the Skyhold castle... for what? Blackwall is treated like a major asset. Why would I have three companions with me at all times when the majority of quests and tasks I'm setting out to do should be performed by an entire army? It's a goddam holy war spanning multiple nations, and I'm assaulting a fortified keep with just myself and three buddies? That's ridiculously OP and also ignores the scale of the operations you're conducting.

 

Dragon Age Origins made sense because by nature of the story, you're one of two surviving Grey Wardens and only Grey Wardens have the treaties and power to get a bunch of people together. Then at the final battle, you SEE those factions with you - you see an entire Dalish army spawn out there, you see a whole army of golems come out if you got those.

 

Yeah, I didn't buy the Bioware party formula in ME 2 or Dragon Age 2 either. I liked ME 2, but you can't explain why it would be better to recruit someone like Jack, Zaeed, Samura or Thane when realistically TIM should just give you an elite Cerberus team (which apparently exists in amble volume in ME 3) that's actually worked all together in the field beforehand.

 

And Fenris or Anders still being your sidekick even when you constantly help/repress mages just because your interesting never made much sense to me. Without a end of the world plot holding that group together the whole thing falls apart. 

[sjsharp2011]

After the destruction of the Temple of Sacred Ashes, much of the beginning of the game does focus on mage-Templar fighting in the Hinterlands.  There is also the issue of the corruption of the Templars with Red Lyrium which, of course, comes out of the idol found by Hawke & company during their Deep Roads expedition.  Even the whole Cory plot can be soon to grow out of Legacy? (I haven't played it yet).  Of course, people may miss their Hawke character in DAI just as they still miss the Hero of Fereldan. 

 

 

Soon after you meet Anders, it quickly becomes clear that his merger with Justice has made him a  real train wreck.  Although I did not appreciate at the time that the gathering of Drakestone in the sewers was akin to providing this radical with fertilizer, when he asks you to distract the Grand Cleric while he does something he has to keep secret from you, it becomes clear that this is a companion you can no longer trust.  And knowing that he will blow up the Chantry no matter what makes you want to avoid him on subsequent playthroughs even though you can't change what ultimately happens.  Being able to "save" Anders (even if it only means that the Chantry will be blown up by some other radical mage) would give the game in general and Anders' character in particular greater replayability.

 

I did like the serial killer plot with the mother.  I only wish that this was a quest that would allow you to save the mother if you did the right thing at the right time.  This should have been possible given that the mother is only a minor character.

That's why I enjoiy playing the games 1 after the other that way I get to spend quality time with all 3 of my heroes

[GoldenGail3]

Yeah, I didn't buy the Bioware party formula in ME 2 or Dragon Age 2 either. I liked ME 2, but you can't explain why it would be better to recruit someone like Jack, Zaeed, Samura or Thane when realistically TIM should just give you an elite Cerberus team (which apparently exists in amble volume in ME 3) that's actually worked all together in the field beforehand.
 
And Fenris or Anders still being your sidekick even when you constantly help/repress mages just because your interesting never made much sense to me. Without a end of the world plot holding that group together the whole thing falls apart.

Anders (smacks head)

[vbibbi]

 

 

Let's clarify: Hawke don't use magic on Kirkwall' public street, and at templars. (Yes, he use, for the game mechanism, but not according to the story.) It also demonstrates some scenes, for example this (3:15):

 

//indavideo.hu/video/DA2_Qunari_scene

 

I mean, we did fight in front of Cullen when we found him and Wilmod. So we can headcanon that mage!Hawke didn't use magic in that fight, but there is the possibility that Cullen has seen Hawke using magic.

 

My only gripe with Bioware right now is that their formula is getting way old - you must, must recruit a bunch of companions for a final battle. Even when it doesn't really make sense for the story at hand.

 

It worked perfectly with Mass Effect 2.  It was an infiltration operation, a suicide mission, so you needed 1. a small team 2. needed to investigate and tie up personal interests for everyone in that team 3. the duress of the mission meant that you got really close with your team members.

 

It also worked in Dragon Age 2, because you're in a city, made some friends because of specific expeditions or things you've done in the past, and met people through those experiences, like in real life. And they're not necessarily under your command, they're just tagging along because you're interesting, they like adventure, and you're constantly just...hanging out and doing things in the city. They even have their own homes in the city and their own lives, so it works out like that.

 

Inquisition insulted this experience by having these specific team mates take up prominent roles in the Skyhold castle... for what? Blackwall is treated like a major asset. Why would I have three companions with me at all times when the majority of quests and tasks I'm setting out to do should be performed by an entire army? It's a goddam holy war spanning multiple nations, and I'm assaulting a fortified keep with just myself and three buddies? That's ridiculously OP and also ignores the scale of the operations you're conducting.

 

Dragon Age Origins made sense because by nature of the story, you're one of two surviving Grey Wardens and only Grey Wardens have the treaties and power to get a bunch of people together. Then at the final battle, you SEE those factions with you - you see an entire Dalish army spawn out there, you see a whole army of golems come out if you got those.

Yeah I didn't see why ME2 had us recruit all of these specialists. If we had some intel on what to expect for the SM it would make more sense, but as it was, it seemed like TIM was just throwing the kitchen sink at the problem. Maybe the leader of the Collectors will need to be eliminated to break the forces' morale...let's hire Thane to assassinate it. We've already recruited a powerful biotic in Jack, let's recruit another one, a rigid justicar who most likely will turn on Cerberus as soon as the mission is done. I bet the Collectors have some kewl l00t in their base, let's see if Kasumi can steal some of it.

 

Mordin made sense. Legion made sense in that we didn't set out to recruit it, it came into our path. Dr. Okeer made sense since he had had dealings with the Collectors before. Jack made sense if I headcanon that having a powerful biotic is always helpful, and Cerberus planned on reclaiming her for more experiments when the SM was over. Garrus made sense if I headcanon that Cerberus wanted to make Shep at ease and see a friendly face working with them. But everyone else needs even more headcanon to make sense. Especially since the very pro-human terrorist group would rather select humanity's best and brightest for this rather than admit that other species could be just as/more capable and valuable resources.

 

Yeah, I didn't buy the Bioware party formula in ME 2 or Dragon Age 2 either. I liked ME 2, but you can't explain why it would be better to recruit someone like Jack, Zaeed, Samura or Thane when realistically TIM should just give you an elite Cerberus team (which apparently exists in amble volume in ME 3) that's actually worked all together in the field beforehand.

 

And Fenris or Anders still being your sidekick even when you constantly help/repress mages just because your interesting never made much sense to me. Without a end of the world plot holding that group together the whole thing falls apart. 

Yeah agreed. I think an elite Cerberus team would have made more sense. Or at least start with a commando squad, we face the Collectors at Horizon and get trashed, then Shep decides to pull rank and recruit outside of humanity. That would also make Ash/Kaiden's reaction a bit better if they saw us backed by a terrorist cell rather than Garrus and another non-Cerberus alien.

 

For DA2, I think it would have been good if we had the option of kicking both Fenris and Anders out of our group at any point in Act 2 or 3. Don't make them leave voluntarily, but pull a Sera and let them know that their beliefs are clashing with ours and it's better we go our separate ways. Anders would still be in the sewers and blow up the Chantry, since he does this if we kick him out in the available choice in Act 2. I liked that none of the companions would voluntarily leave except Isabella at the end of Act 2 and then the game ending, as I didn't need to worry about micromanaging relationships when it was a very polarizing storyline to navigate.

[Addictress]

I have to concede with you all that the recruitment of those companions in ME2 was awkward as well.

 

Suffice to say I think it was just overridden by the awesomeness of the characters and their side stories.

[Addictress]

Its a stylistic choice that's at odds with the execution and scope that BW implemented. There's a way to make it work and DA2 didn't go that way.If you like it then no one's stopping you, but those of us who see the game's flaws and issues aren't bashing the game because "we don't get".

 

For instance, the mage templar dynamic is much better in Origins because both sides still have elements of sympathy and humanity to them. Sure, there's the negative stuff like blood mages, abominations and demons for mages and tranquility, restrictive attitudes, and paranoia for templars. However, both sides had moderates and rationally minded individuals who were simply doing what they thought was right. Gregeor didn't want to invoke the Right of Annulment, but the situation was getting really dire and thus, he sent word for the sake of the people outside of the tower. Irving and Wynne are responsible mages who were struggling to protect them home from the corrupt mages. Even the blood mages were a little sympathetic once you hear their side of things.

 

The player was allowed to make a few natural choices on their own terms and could make an informed decision based on our character's morals and beliefs. The Warden could therefore save the non-rebelling mages; save the mages, but turn them over to the templars; or kill all of the mages rather they're blood mages or not. Which one is the right choice? That's going to depend on your Warden and maybe there is no right choice. But these are real choices with real interest behind them.

 

Feels dramatic for you? Cool. However, I saw this as a prime example of forced drama which undermined any real sense of tension. You know what? What's wrong with Hawke saying that he's standing above the conflict and engaging it on his own terms? That would demonstrate real strength because he won't be bullied by non-sequitors or the same madness that's infected both sides. Hence, its more dramatic and tragic when he struggles against this madness and only gains a pyrrhic victory at best with the Mage-Templar war still enveloping Thedas. Plus, Kirkwall is still ruined despite his efforts to protect it and both factions mark Hawke as their enemy with some believing that he sided with the templars and others believing that he's working with mages.

 

The above would have been much better. You still get the intended affect, you still get a lot of drama, you still get a good set-up for the next game, and all without crippling player agency and putting a barrier of apathy between the player and the story.

 

We get DA2 and what it was trying to do. But that doesn't excuse it from stumbling or from being the weakest BW game ever released. Maybe if the game wasn't rushed, it would have had more time to refine its ideas and intentions into something more worthwhile. But as is, it isn't brilliant despite its best efforts. The story structure has a rushed Prologue that keeps changing its tone every 2 minutes; a decent 1st Act to set up the characters and let the setting breathe; an excellent 2nd Act where the game's story peaks; and then Act 3 is where everything falls flat on its face and abruptly ends without any true closure.

What scope?  The scope of Origins?

 

That's the BW you're comparing this with. If you just compare DA2 on its own terms and by itself, it's fine. Sure, it is ajar with Origins.

 

There were rational folk in DA2 as well (such as Elthina and Keran/Samson), but the story takes place at a tumultuous time in Kirkwall. As Varric describes in his narration, you're entering into a time in Kirkwall when everything is coming to a head and the zealots are taking over the streets of Kirkwall - that's literally the setting of the story. 

 

Meredith is extreme. Orsino is extreme. They represent the extremes of the debate and what is really at stake - it's truly meant to be a climax in tensions. That's why the scenery of this story is not populated by calm, rational folk. You're in the middle of the climax of a war that has been brewing for centuries, to the point that a centuries-old institution like the Chantry is literally going to fall apart. 

 

So no, you don't get it. Apparently you don't get the central point of the story at all.

[ShadowLordXII]

What scope?  The scope of Origins?

 

That's the BW you're comparing this with. If you just compare DA2 on its own terms and by itself, it's fine. Sure, it is ajar with Origins.

 

There were rational folk in DA2 as well (such as Elthina and Keran/Samson), but the story takes place at a tumultuous time in Kirkwall. As Varric describes in his narration, you're entering into a time in Kirkwall when everything is coming to a head and the zealots are taking over the streets of Kirkwall - that's literally the setting of the story. 

 

Meredith is extreme. Orsino is extreme. They represent the extremes of the debate and what is really at stake - it's truly meant to be a climax in tensions. That's why the scenery of this story is not populated by calm, rational folk. You're in the middle of the climax of a war that has been brewing for centuries, to the point that a centuries-old institution like the Chantry is literally going to fall apart. 

 

So no, you don't get it. Apparently you don't get the central point of the story at all.

 

Well, DA2 was rushed and labeled as Origin's sequel. It doesn't get a pass for not measuring up to Origin's standards just because its different.

 

I get the point. The central point is that the conflict of mages and templars is inevitable. Kirkwall also has inherent qualities that make it the perfect powderkeg and add in various conflicts and certain individuals, it was bound to blow. The weakness of DA2 isn't a matter of idea and theme, its a matter of execution and refinement. DA2 lacked much of the latter and needed more time to properly refine their execution, but that didn't happen and thus look at the mess that we got.

 

BW failed to effectively get their point across. It also failed to really engage the player by allowing them to react to this situation as they see fit. Being forced to play along with one extreme in response to another extreme is not engaging. That's a recipe for apathy, especially if the choice at hand leads to the same end anyway. You want a grey-grey conflict done right? Look up the Battle of Blackwater from ASOIAF and that one battle alone schools the entire construction of DA2's main conflict. You don't turn a grey-grey conflict into a black-black conflict in the dumbest and most obvious way possible and expect people to keep caring or become more engaged.

 

You want to throw the player into a situation that they can't control and keep them invested? Manage the scale of the situation better so that the limits of player agency are more natural than they are contrived. Heck, as I said before...the Qunari conflict is handled way better because you could deal with it on your own terms. Antagonize the Qunari? Treat them with Respect? Kill the Arishok mano y mano? Sell out Isabella? All are natural choices that follow according to the player's actions and role-play angle.

 

Which is the issue here. DA2 is a game, not a novel. The unique aspect of a game is that there is an organic and thinking player who has an active role in the the game and is actively pressing it forward. When there's a balance between narrative bounds and player agency, the experience is enriching and engaging. When narrative bounds intrudes on and restricts player agency, the narrative looses legitimacy. On the flip-side, having the player trump over the story entirely and go crazy creates chaos.

 

Before DA2, BW understood this and that's what I mean about managing the scope of the game's characters, setting, and story. With DA2, they decided to experiment with something different and the experiment failed because it lacked proper development and refinement time. No amount of brow-beating or subjective defenses can ever change this. It doesn't change whether you "get" DA2 or not.

[SgtSteel91]

I managed to get around my misgivings about the whole having to side with one extreme or another by having Bethany be taken to the Circle. Now, I'm invested in siding with the Mages in the endgame because Hawke's sister is going to be targeted by the Annulment.

[Jedi Comedian]

I'll tell you what, I just realized my favourite DA game overall is DA2, so:
DA2>DAO>DAI
I just love badass normal chars.

DA2 and ME2 are my favs, gotta love the merry band of misfits.

[Addictress]

Whatever ShadowLord, it didn't fail. It's excellent to me, and other fans. I thought it was enriching AND ENGAGING all the way through.

really think it's just personal taste. Not an objective flaw.

[ShadowLordXII]

Whatever ShadowLord, it didn't fail. It's excellent to me, and other fans. I thought it was enriching AND ENGAGING all the way through.

really think it's just personal taste. Not an objective flaw.

 

Hey, if you like it then that's fine. That's what subjective taste is all about after all.

 

I'll even admit that bleak and dark vs dark conflicts aren't my favorite subjects. But as long as the story is executed and written well, then I'll acknowledge it as a great work. Hence why bleak tales like Antigone, Berserk, Glory, ASOIAF, Gundam: Stardust Memory, and so on are all some of my favorite tales. They're not perfect, but the pros outweigh the cons and they're not just bleak and dark just for the sake of being different.

 

If you have a great idea, but you fail to properly execute it, then that's an objective failing. And I actually liked Dragon Age 2 and believe that it does have good stuff in it. It's just not enough to overshadow its failings, flaws and missteps no matter how much I personally liked the good stuff.

[FemShem]

I love DA2. I played it 9x. It had the potential to be the best written, but act 3 was written in a month, and we had limited character interactions when there weren't cut scenes.

Great dialogue and plot structures, but the writers only had a year, instead of two.

Actually if you play DA:I act I like your Hawke and just read the dialogue that way and the Cory reveal is awesome...which it was suppose to be...but EA hatcheted everything and had the writing team slap on act 3 because the game was too short.

The war was going to happen no matter what...and it was...we're given that info in Inquisition. That plot line was laid out in advance, pretty sure that was true, what Anders did was inconsequential to the main plot...it just beat you over the head like a dead horse instead of being like...wow we're at war!

I love the relationships between characters and Hawke has a hell of a journey. If the writers had another year, I dunno how fab it would have been. Is it my fav, yes. Is it the best written...probably not, DA:O is, but 2 is better than I writing wise. Inquisition falls a little flat, but the game is a great deal better.

The writing in 2 if pretty fab, but they just had more time in Origins, and they were rushed in 2. Some of Act 3 doesn't make sense at all. Orsino's decision really isn't in character, I'm not going to sit here and rip it up, it is my fav.

It could have been the best, but EA cut corners and time. The game developers were totally screwed, though nice heads up display.

Loved the characters though.

[Akiza]

 

 

What DA2 did wrong (not mentioning the things like reusing assets and other obvious ones) is that the story lasts 10 years, but sometimes doesn't really feel like it. I feel like a lot less people would be surprised by Anders' actions if they realized he ran a free clinic, shoved his manifesto at anyone who would listen, and ran an underground for 10 years, and all that changed was that all the mages would be soon slaughtered, because of Meredith's lyrium induced insanity. In that context, it makes sense he would move to drastic measures.

 

The flow of time in the series  is a very important aspect for characters like Anders.

This is true also for DAI where given the travels performed by the Inquisitor the defeat of COrypheus happens  i think in at least 2-3 years.

 

Anyway to me is

 

DAII

DAI

DAO

 

the main plot of both DAO and DAI felt to generic and boring with these two Mhuawaaa stupid ancient evils, only one who made the plot of DAO interesting was Loghain whom i redeemed

[Midnight Bliss]

It's a shame, because if it wasn't for best served cold & the last straw it would have been so, SO much better. I could have overlooked some of the quirks/reused assets/everything being in the same few areas but those were just so awkward and poorly done, bleh...

 

In spite of it though I think DA2 might be my favorite story of the franchise, it's pretty hard to top playing a neutral Hawke who cracks wise and kicks mercs in the dick.