|
Captain Oblivious posted:Sure. I'd say that's a problem independent of Orsino though. True. But seriously what kind of game makes you root for the cops  .My favorite/least favorite quest is still the one where you help some mages escape and they still kidnap your friends  .
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 05:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 23:11 |
|
|
Pick posted:True. But seriously what kind of game makes you root for the cops One in which their job is policing a group of people who's very existence, by definition, makes the idea of a secular society governed by the rule of law unlikely to ever, ever happen. #killallmages
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 05:57
|
|
|
I guess you can enjoy any game if you are very liberal with your interpretation of the writing. I'll just say that Bioware is not nearly as clever as they think they are, and you should generally read all their stuff at face value. Which is why I can't enjoy their games when the bad writing comes up; I know exactly how they want you to read it and it's incredibly stupid. I suppose to varied responses can give you the illusion of depth since it feels like you can supply your own response to these events, but that doesn't really work for me. I mean you could read Merril as a deconstruction of the fragile fantasy waifu trope, but that seems silly when Bioware fully embraced that trope when writing her. Plus if they really wanted to do that they could of gone about it in a far better way. With Dragon Age: Origins and Mass Effect it didn't feel like I had to stretch the writing so far just to enjoy the characters.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 05:58
|
|
|
Captain Oblivious posted:One in which their job is policing a group of people who's very existence, by definition, makes the idea of a secular society governed by the rule of law unlikely to ever, ever happen. I'm still angry that siding with the Templars as a mage doesn't get you a more interesting conversation. This would have been a great time to break out the "decision is set, explain your motivations" dialogue. I'm also still angry you never got to hassle Carver about screwing his elf crush Merrill or his mancrush Fenris, that would have been amazing. "You know that guy you think is so cool and hardcore? Well I hosed him, hosed him right in the butt."
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 05:59
|
|
|
Internet Kraken posted:I mean you could read Merril as a deconstruction of the fragile fantasy waifu trope, but that seems silly when Bioware fully embraced that trope when writing her. Yeah, I mean I suppose you could have that read on it. But other Bioware writers clearly didn't get the memo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 06:00
|
|
|
Pick posted:That would have been cool, if not for my concerns about balance. In my mind, you've got to have at least one non-abomination, non-blood mage somewhere who is both important and not the player character. We get sympathetic Templars multiple times! I've said it before and I'll say it again, that was deliberate. Gaider admitted that he knew nobody would pick the Templar side with Meredith and the like as its head, so the writers went out of the way to show mages at the absolute worst while pushing sympathetic Templars to the forefront. Unfortunately, this backfired. Instead of two sympathetic sides of a complex social issue with no clear right answer, you ended up with nothing but fascist thugs vs. satanic lunatics clashing in the most destructive, easily avoided manner possible. A major flaw that Gaider acknowledged when asked about what went wrong in DAII. That said, I don't believe it's fair to completely write off the Circle given that we didn't get to meet it at all in this game. Everybody we saw were fugitives who honestly had nothing to lose (remember, due process and trials are non-existent for mages, its Circle or death if Templars find them). The common Circle mage was carefully, deliberately hidden to avoid building up too much sympathy for the Templars to win over players. Geostomp fucked around with this message at 06:07 on Sep 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 06:00
|
|
|
FauxGateau posted:Yeah, I mean I suppose you could have that read on it. But other Bioware writers clearly didn't get the memo. This is a problem multiple times when party banter or other conversations don't like up with one-to-one dialogue sessions. I genuinely think it would have been ironed out if the writers had more time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 06:01
|
|
|
Internet Kraken posted:I guess you can enjoy any game if you are very liberal with your interpretation of the writing. The author is dead and all that jazz!
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 06:01
|
|
|
Internet Kraken posted:I guess you can enjoy any game if you are very liberal with your interpretation of the writing. I'll just say that Bioware is not nearly as clever as they think they are, and you should generally read all their stuff at face value. Why should I interpret things their way? I paid for the game and I'll consume it my way.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 06:02
|
|
|
Captain Oblivious posted:One in which their job is policing a group of people who's very existence, by definition, makes the idea of a secular society governed by the rule of law unlikely to ever, ever happen. Really, there should have been an intentional "kill both" option. As well as "skip town". "Tell me, dwarf, what happened next?" "Hawke was like 'woooahhh, gently caress this' so we loaded up all our poo poo onto a boat and got the hell out of there. People credit her with this disaster but actually she didn't want anything to do with it. It was kooks versus kooks."
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 06:04
|
|
|
Pick posted:Why should I interpret things their way? I paid for the game and I'll consume it my way. Well more power to you. Like I said when I read stories (at least ones written by skilled writers, which Bioware would have us believe they are) things like author intent stick out in my mind unless I get truly immersed. It's hard for me to get immersed when the characters are all blithering idiots. When that happens my first thought isn't to ponder what story reason they have to be so stupid, it's to think about why the writer has done such a lovely job with these characters. To use Merril as an example yet again, she does nothing to endear herself to the player. Right off the bat she is shown to be scatterbrained, awkward, and sensitive. Then she just summons a demon for the task of getting rid of a wall, and brushes it off as saying no it's just cool. So not only does she portray herself as incompetent, she also shows incredibly dangerous powers with poor justification for using them. At no point does she demonstrate sufficient control over dealing with demons, we're just supposed to take her word on it. Even when she actively doubts herself on multiple occasions. There is zero reason for you to trust Merril with anything. So if she is supposed to be a deconstruction of the fantasy waifu, right off the bat she fails since I have no reason to like her. You are going to expect bad stuff to happen with Merril from the start. Then it happens because surprise Merril is an idiot. Whether you encourage or criticize her is ultimately irrelevant since the outcome is the same. It's not a deconstruction of the trope when it plays exactly to your expectations. Some different dialogue lines at the end of her quest aren't enough to fully explore that concept. If they really were picking that trope apart then Merril would of changed drastically over the course of the game depending on how you interacted with her. And if I were playing the game, I'd be pissed off since I knew this idiot was going to cause problems from the start yet I am unable to do anything about it. Characters being incredibly stupid draws me straight out of the game. Internet Kraken fucked around with this message at 06:21 on Sep 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 06:18
|
|
|
Pick posted:Really, there should have been an intentional "kill both" option. It's a shame that you rarely ever get options like this. The Bards Tale (the newer one on last gen consoles) and the Witcher are the only examples I can think of and I've played.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 06:20
|
|
|
Internet Kraken posted:And if I were playing the game, I'd be pissed off since I knew this idiot was going to cause problems from the start yet I am unable to do anything about it. Characters being incredibly stupid draws me straight out of the game. I like that your characters have lives independent of you and don't necessarily take your word as gospel. Merrill is your companion, but you don't own her; you shouldn't be able to casually deter her from a dream she literally gave everything to chase. I've known people like Merrill, people who moved penniless to Chicago from the PNW to become "playwrights". Do you think I supported them or didn't support them, why or why not? Do you think it ended exactly like everyone expected it to?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 06:24
|
|
|
Pick posted:True. But seriously what kind of game makes you root for the cops I am trying to get through DA2 with the DLC installed and was just thinking of that quest today as I walked past Grace in the Gallows. gently caress you, Grace. gently caress. You.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 06:35
|
|
|
Captain Oblivious posted:One in which their job is policing a group of people who's very existence, by definition, makes the idea of a secular society governed by the rule of law unlikely to ever, ever happen. First, the society of Thedas is anything but secular or ruled by law. Every major civilization is run by a religious authority and corruption is rampant at all levels. Magic didn't cause that problem. Second, mage genocide is impossible. Births are random and undetectable until powers manifest at puberty. Any surviving mages (don't fool yourself into thinking you'll get them all) will be more resentful than ever, practically guaranteeing war. Not that they had much reason to be loyal before given how badly they are treated under law as it stands. Third, the current mage policing system is horribly designed. It involves an army of religiously indoctrinated, drug addled knights being ordered to treat any person suspected of even meeting a mage as a criminal (or to be sicced on anyone the Chantry is pissed at at the moment). It offers next to no reward for mage loyalty beyond "you get to live and have a nice room if you act as our artillery whenever we demand it". It has nothing even resembling due process and allows said drug addled, indoctrinated knights full control over their charges' entire lives. Including free reign of punishments ranging from solitary confinement, to "mind wiping", to death. It's not surprising that mages have no love for normal people when their entire identity is reduced to "mage of X Circle" and they endure this treatment. Instead of intilling loyalty and responsibility, it seems practically designed to breed resentment. Fourth, even if mages were somehow exterminated, Fade-related dangers would still occur. Probably more than ever now that everybody is equally appetizing to demons and mages aren't around to deter warfare. I really feel the best way to take care of this sort of X-men villain thinking is to remove the player character immunity from PC mages. Hell, go whole hog and make a mage-based spin-off. Show what the mages actually have to deal with in story: a complete lack of rights, bucket-headed zealots hounding you at every turn without any hope of reason, random people hating and fearing you, intense mental training, and even the occasional demon trying to poke into your head all for an accident of birth. If being a mage is so fundamentally different than being a warrior or rogue, prove it by forcing them to deal with the in-story problems. Prove the system right or wrong by letting the player actually experience these issues and either rise above them or drat the muggles. Throw in some political intrigue from the Chantry or whatever and you've got yourself a game. That sort of first-hand experience has a lot more impact than the occasional whining NPC or losing "family" you've known for twenty minutes. It'd also eliminate the false dichotomy of "mage vs. templar" that assumes that nothing exists besides anarchy and the current system. instead we'd have a more complex theme of how magic works in society. VVVEdit: If they'd focused on that instead of trying to turn it into a parable, it'd honestly feel a lot better. Geostomp fucked around with this message at 07:03 on Sep 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 06:54
|
|
Internet Kraken posted:Merril dies from food poisoning before Act 2 because she bought rotten meat from some shifty vendor near her house. How could she not buy it when he told him it was good? While Merrill is probably my least favorite of the lot, I think that part of her characterization is certainly intentional. She's mostly naive and helpless in a fish-out-water, Encino Man kind of way. She went from close-knit nomadic hunter-gatherer tribe of blood kin to living in a medieval metropolis of urban vice and solitude with peer groups completely at odds with her own (even the city elves). There's definitely going to be some cultural shock. In particular she's unused to the big city things like brothels, gambling, general dishonesty, rampant crime and, unique to the Thedas setting, being an blood mage apostate in a Pro-Templar, Pro-Chantry city featuring a mage gallows*. In some ways she's like a weirdo outsider like Morrigan, except Morrigan is a sarcastic rear end in a top hat who assumes everyone's out to get them while Merrill never learned cynicism as there weren't Templars hunting down her mom when she was growing up. In some ways that could -possibly- make her more suited to dealing with Demons imho, because it's not like there's much malignance or negativity in her to begin with for demons to exploit and infect, recalling demons are generally of the rage, pride, lust, hunger, etc variety. When it comes to demon quest-related stuff, Merrill's quite a bit more at home. She can companion-interrupt destroy a Rock Wraith Demon mini-boss, she can sense the lack of demon taint in Kevan, she can magically stop the blood mage prostitute, etc. Ultimately, her Act 3 plan would've worked but the Keeper intervened and absorbed the demon because she didn't believe Merrill could defeat it, I don't think you can blame Merrill for her Keeper's actions or her clan from taking it the wrong way. I think they really could have hammered Merrill's expertise here if Merrill was not blatantly tricked by the demon in Fenriel's dream so easily. That, to me, made her seem more incapable of dealing with demons than anything else. *I really don't think muggers pose any threat to a blood mage per se, re: Varric's bribes, except that Merrill could out herself by nuking them. Pick posted:It is anti-power-fantasy. You are Batman Can't believe I actually read these words unironically. HenessyHero fucked around with this message at 07:55 on Sep 29, 2013 |
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 06:59
|
|
|
The next three words are important ("and are terrible"). You are fantasy Batman as Batman would be--a totally ineffectual dilettante who gets credit for inappropriately treating occasional symptoms of wider social problems that would be somewhat within his or her power to solve if he or she were willing to liquidate the gentry-level lifestyle. You are living the dream and ultimately it hurts everyone, even yourself. Also you just said Merrill was Encino Man, so I think we both agree ridiculous comparisons are awesome  .
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 07:04
|
|
|
Geostomp posted:First, the society of Thedas is anything but secular or ruled by law. Every major civilization is run by a religious authority and corruption is rampant at all levels. Magic didn't cause that problem. Firstly, I am aware. That is why I said "ever happen". Mages cannot be contained effectively by any law or oversight. The ability to circumvent the law and abuse their fellow man in an untraceable fashion is a fundamental part of their existence. Two, the impossibility of perfection is not a reason to shy from "better". Less mages is always better. Third, religion is the only force at this stage in history that can plausibly enact any solution. The drugs are necessary because mages are simply Humans But Better Than, and due process is worthless when your subject matter has an invisible gun in their head that you can't tell who they're pointing it at, leaves no evidence, and can also mind control people. Fourth, demons do not work that way. They aren't human, they aren't the Gods of Warhammer Fantasy. They are Fey. If they see an opportunity, they take it and exploit it according to their nature because they can be no other. Less mages would just give them less opportunities.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 07:10
|
|
Pick posted:The next three words are important ("and are terrible"). You are fantasy Batman as Batman would be--a totally ineffectual dilettante who gets credit for inappropriately treating occasional symptoms of wider social problems that would be somewhat within his or her power to solve if he or she were willing to liquidate the gentry-level lifestyle. You are living the dream and ultimately it hurts everyone, even yourself. I guess I misinterpreted. It would make more sense if you said if you were a Batman who's terrible at being Batman. Batman, as in the comics, does a balanced act of fighting very low-level crime in progress that would definitely fly under the radar of an overworked, understaffed police department while also battling high-end criminals way beyond the league of any police department. As Bruce Wayne, he deals with crime on an economic level through charitible works and foundations that alleviate the very grassroot causes of crime themselves, i.e. the persisting social problems of a decadent city. Normally Batman is like -the- definition of power fantasy because he's awesome at everything and -mostly- never does anything wrong aside from being a general sourpuss. Still though, the words totally ineffectual dilettante reminds me of that conversation Varric has with Hawke where he thinks Hawke might be the best thing that ever happened to Kirkwall
HenessyHero fucked around with this message at 07:59 on Sep 29, 2013 |
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 07:27
|
|
|
Internet Kraken posted:I mean you could read Merril as a deconstruction of the fragile fantasy waifu trope, but that seems silly when Bioware fully embraced that trope when writing her. Plus if they really wanted to do that they could of gone about it in a far better way. That's just the thing. Crediting Bioware as doing some high level satire is giving them FAR FAR too much credit. The truth of the matter is that they're just bad writers that think they're far better than they really are. They're on the level with most NaNoWriMo writers, but those people aren't trying to sell you their poo poo as high literature.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 07:54
|
|
|
With regards to the general storyline of DA2, and its eventual scope, I also definitely think that all of it was intentional though my interpretation is at odds with what most people think. In the end, something very big happens at Kirkwall, full-stop. It is the patient zero of the mage revolution strictly as a given. We're hearing it all from Varric completely after the fact. What happens in the game is going to play a big role in the setting by design, because the Templar-Mage situation is one of the cornerstones of the setting and the ripples of Kirkwall will reach all ends of their world. You think that whatever happened there must've been this big, momentous event involving big players. Indeed, in the beginning Cassadra interrogates Varric believing it was all part of a grand scheme, believing in this fancy story, and believing that it was a masterful web woven by one most intricate plotters there ever was. She assumes from incomplete knowledge that Hawke, a member of a family of apostates engineered the whole revolution in a space of ten years by recruiting blood mages, other apostates, experimental subjects, world-renowned theives, etc from all corners of Thedas and even inserting his/her own sibling as a sleeper agent in either the Templars (Carver), the Circle (Bethany), or the Grey Wardens (Both). By first securing an enormous amount of capital from the deeproads, Hawke maneuvers a conflict between the Qunari and Kirkwall (by having someone steal a Tome) wherein Hawke can thrust himself into a position of power after its resolution. Hawke also manages to poison the mind the Meredith with an unknown demonic artefact, culminating in a seemingly justifiable revolution later on. There are plenty more details Cassandra has an aggrandized version of. Then we hear the real tale. It is nothing momentous, it is nothing masterful. It was a bunch of jerks all bumbling their way through life unintentionally causing catastrophe after castastrophe through a series of unfortunate coincidences. That's pretty much completely it. In some ways it's like assuming an International, Multi-million Dollar Drug Empire was born out of something grand and carefully planned, then what you really get is a pair of jerks starting out by cooking meth in trailer and then loving up at Every. Possible. Corner. It's significantly more organic storytelling and I definitely think that was intentional. I don't think DA2 was a parody of the usual story stucture of a grandoise RPG storyline per se, but I do think it was a genuine **attempt** at making a humbler, more nuclear and a more living shot at story-telling. VVV Maintaing a status quo is hard-work man. That's like calling the medical profession ineffective, despite all of lives it ultimately saves, just because it hasn't also cured aids, cancer or death yet. HenessyHero fucked around with this message at 09:24 on Sep 29, 2013 |
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 08:33
|
|
|
HenessyHero posted:Normally Batman is like -the- definition of power fantasy because he's awesome at everything and -mostly- never does anything wrong aside from being a general sourpuss. Yet the nature of comic book reality dictates that the status quo must remain unchanged, and thus Batman is rendered ultimately ineffectual. He is the world's most competent guy, accomplishing nothing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 09:10
|
|
|
Captain Oblivious posted:Firstly, I am aware. That is why I said "ever happen". Mages cannot be contained effectively by any law or oversight. The ability to circumvent the law and abuse their fellow man in an untraceable fashion is a fundamental part of their existence. But mages=better doesn't work. There will always be fewer mages, and from everything we see in game they aren't that hard to kill. If they were so dangerous, Tevinter would rule the world, or demons would already have flooded it. Society presumably dealt with the problem successfully for millennia before Templars and their abilities even existed. Magic is dangerous but it's not an I-win button And the game still does nothing to sell us on the danger. The absolute worst case oh poo poo scenario we see is that the goo from amnesia takes over a tower, before the Templars contain it as they're supposed to and a team of four (exceptional) guys wades straight on through. The worst thing we ever hear about is Kirkwall - is an ongoing, industrial scale genocide really worth it just to avoid the possibility of fantasy Aztecs or Roman thought police? Ones that were put down by conventional means anyway, and committed crimes whose non magical equivalents could be common enough anyway on the basis of religion or politics or whatever? Edit - It's basically Mass Effect all over again. Mages will always rise up and too many people will die. So we 
Strategic Tea fucked around with this message at 09:18 on Sep 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 09:15
|
|
|
Penakoto posted:It's a shame that you rarely ever get options like this. The Bards Tale (the newer one on last gen consoles) and the Witcher are the only examples I can think of and I've played. Clearly they should just allow the Grand Inquisitor - or whatever the PC's default title will be - to have the option of raiding any Kirkwall-esque cesspit if they are able to write a convincing missive to the chantry that the area was FUBAR and it was better to "secure what could be saved" and start over. "No one could be talked down or negotiated with, we had to kill nearly everyone there. Demon happy Mages, Remnant Templars, Crooked Noblesse de chancellerie, inbred Noblesse d'épée, that prévôt des marchands who gave us ugly capes - they all became abominations and had to be put down." The Divine allows it as long as she gets a cut of the booty. Crabtree fucked around with this message at 09:28 on Sep 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 09:21
|
|
|
Mordiceius posted:That's just the thing. Crediting Bioware as doing some high level satire is giving them FAR FAR too much credit. The truth of the matter is that they're just bad writers that think they're far better than they really are. They're on the level with most NaNoWriMo writers, but those people aren't trying to sell you their poo poo as high literature. You can say that, but that Merrill is a deconstruction of that particular character type is a perfectly valid reading of what's there. There's easily enough evidence that that may have been their intention all along. We can't know, obviously, but it's certainly possible. And besides, if it can be taken that way, and we think that's better, there's no reason not to. It's not clear that what they intended even matters. CottonWolf fucked around with this message at 12:02 on Sep 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 11:48
|
|
|
Pick posted:I like that your characters have lives independent of you and don't necessarily take your word as gospel. Merrill is your companion, but you don't own her; you shouldn't be able to casually deter her from a dream she literally gave everything to chase. And see, that would be perfectly fine if Merril wasn't established as being completely incompetent. She is not confident in herself. Trying to live on her own is basically impossible for her. Yet she insists on still dealing with demons, despite it repeatedly proving to be a really loving bad idea. Merril is not an independent person, she is aware of this, yet she still clings to the idea that blood magic is not a problem. It doesn't mesh with the rest of her personality at all. The only reason she ignores you is because she is stupid, and that is not a character you can expect most people to enjoy. Like if Merril was actually competent at dealing with demons it would be another story, but like HenessyHero said she gets tricked by a demon that literally says "I'll help you with (impossible) thing!". It just asked her to betray are friends and she agreed to it. If you can fall for the easiest trick in the book, you shouldn't be allowed to cast a spell let alone deal with demons of horrifying power. VVV No not really, because comparing the plight of a mage to someone moving to Chicago is a terrible comparison in the first place so I didn't address. Yes people do stupid poo poo in real life. Most people don't do stupid poo poo that threatens entire populations. Also when someone moves to Chicago they are basing their decision based on others success. Demon bartering in the DA setting has no success story, it's said to be a horrible idea everywhere. So justifying Merril stupidity as a character doesn't work that way. Internet Kraken fucked around with this message at 13:17 on Sep 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 13:02
|
|
|
You just missed the point entirely there.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 13:03
|
|
|
No, man, pretty sure you really did miss the point. I'll make it reaaaally simple for you: what do you do, in real life, when one of your friends decides to make a poor decision from which they will not be deterred? Do you support that friend? Why or why not? I gave you one example--a real one--but I can give you others: - Friend decides to marry someone bad for him after a month - Friend quits job as software programmer to become a painter despite having no talent - Friend quits college to go in on a restaurant despite having no restaurant experience All of these endeavors were destined to fail, and did. (Spectacularly, in one case!) But I was not going to be able to change any of their minds because all of these people were deep down kind of foolish. Should I affirm my disapproval or should I support their attempts to achieve dreams out of reach? Literally, tell me: what do you think I did? Pick fucked around with this message at 15:43 on Sep 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 15:28
|
|
|
I find it fascinating that the only people that apparently enjoyed DA II enjoyed it as some bizarre meta-commentary on RPGs that it was almost certainly not intended to be. People who wonder why people come and participate in threads for games they have no intention of buying: this is why we do it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 15:32
|
|
|
CottonWolf posted:You can say that, but that Merrill is a deconstruction of that particular character type is a perfectly valid reading of what's there. There's easily enough evidence that that may have been their intention all along. We can't know, obviously, but it's certainly possible. And besides, if it can be taken that way, and we think that's better, there's no reason not to. It's not clear that what they intended even matters. If we start caring what writers were really thinking every book is going to be "Boy I hope I can get this published and get paid". And seriously, there's no "correct read" of DA2 either and it's kind of silly to presume it exists or that only you personally have the tools to uncover it. It's as ridiculous as fandom "headcanons". We can never prove what any of the writers intended to prove, much less determine the exact qualities and intentions of their combined work. All I know is how I play and enjoy this game and why. Pick fucked around with this message at 15:42 on Sep 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 15:36
|
|
|
Pick posted:Why should I interpret things their way? I paid for the game and I'll consume it my way. I totally agree with you here. There are several ways to interpret DA2: 1. The one that is probably intended by the authors, and which leaves me totally unsatisfied with the storytelling. or 2. My interpretation, which is not supported by out-of-game statements like interpretation one, but which makes me enjoy the game I paid quite a bit of money for. Why would I ever go with another interpretation than 1? I recognize the failings of the game, and think it is very clear that DA:O had the better crafted main storyline. And there are games that cannot be rescued by liberal re-interpretation, so I will be careful before I buy their next product. But instead of constantly raging against the game every time I fire it up, I just enjoy it as much as I can. Death of the author is a real concept in literary science, so it is good enough for me. It helps of course that the battles are quite a bit better than in DA:O. Baldur's Gate had great battles, Diablo 1+2 had great battles, but I was nearly always bored by the combat in Origins. The wave mechanic is not very clever, but I will take it if it is fun. Which it is, try juggling the enemies and your combo points as a rogue, I thought it was highly engaging. It cannot compete with the combat in Mass Effect, but there is a connection here, too. Battles in ME1 were much more boring than those in ME2 + ME3, so I guess Bioware needs at least one game to find out how to develop the right combat mechanics. Of course the combat in DA2 is underappreciated because few players replayed it, so few people played the higher difficulties where things like friendly fire and combos being more important make combat much more fun.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 15:38
|
|
|
Torrannor posted:Of course the combat in DA2 is underappreciated because few players replayed it, so few people played the higher difficulties where things like friendly fire and combos being more important make combat much more fun. Combos yes always good forever. Friendly fire was sometimes fun, and sometimes made me want to gnaw off my own arms in rage. In a good way, but loving christ!
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 15:41
|
|
|
Pick posted:- Friend decides to marry someone bad for him after a month Do any of these things result in demonic forces bursting through to our world, slaughtering countless people.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 15:41
|
|
|
poptart_fairy posted:Do any of these things result in demonic forces bursting through to our world, slaughtering countless people. That would have been an improvement over what happened to restaurant guy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 15:42
|
|
|
Pick posted:That would have been an improvement over what happened to restaurant guy. I notice you avoid the question. Your comparisons are kinda weak, dude. Merril isn't on about shifting her job, she's tampering with forces that are Decidedly Not Good, both in and out of the DA setting.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 15:43
|
|
|
The Sharmat posted:I find it fascinating that the only people that apparently enjoyed DA II enjoyed it as some bizarre meta-commentary on RPGs that it was almost certainly not intended to be. People who wonder why people come and participate in threads for games they have no intention of buying: this is why we do it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 15:44
|
|
|
poptart_fairy posted:Your comparisons are kinda weak, dude. Merril isn't on about shifting her job, she's tampering with forces that are Decidedly Not Good, both in and out of the DA setting. They're not, really, because in the context of the game you know it doesn't matter because ultimately you can defeat whatever happens. It's just scaling it to real life. I'm Crap posted:Yeah. I'm not knocking you, Pick, but you're taking a really strange line of argument here. Like a Yugo owner claiming that it isn't a lovely car because if you open the sunroof it's now the world's most luxurious dumpster instead. That's great that you feel that way, but... Except, if you go back to my big post, I'm not saying DA2 is a great game all-around. It's not. But I disagree with why people think it's a poor game. I think the story by and large works really well, and I love how the companions were handled, especially compared to other RPGs. I also think the combat is better, if not enough better to be "good".
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 15:46
|
|
|
Pick posted:No, man, pretty sure you really did miss the point. You say I'm missing the point yet you completely ignore that I already explained how you can't equate someone's poor decisions in the real world to Merril's situation. It's unique to the DA setting given the natures of mages. Regardless, I guess I'll just explain why by comparing it to every situation you described. -Your friend marrying a bad person isn't equatable to conversing with otherworldly demons that could fry her brain. I don't know what your friend saw in that person, and obviously they had negative qualities, but no human is going to turn you into a horrible monster that can slaughter hundreds. -Your friend had no talent but I'm going to guess believed they could learn. After all, their are tons of resources to consult for learning about art. When consorting with demons Merril has only her own experience to draw on and maybe some incredibly outdated elven lore. Also, loving up a painting won't get you killed. -Working in the restaurant industry is not equatable to demonology. Let me make this clear; what Merril is doing is a universally despised practice. Nearly every modern culture in the setting objects to blood magic. There are no success stories. There is nobody for Merril to learn from, or anyone to support her. The only resource she has to consult are echoes of the long ruined elven golden age, which are not going to tell her everything she needs to know. This is a practice that has you constantly dancing with death, and it's not just your life on the line but also the lives of anyone else that happens to be nearby if you gently caress up. This is how demon summoning is portrayed in the lore. It's how Bioware wants you to view it. So for someone to willingly practice demonology despite literally everybody telling them not to, they would have to be extremely confident in themselves. They would have to be so sure of their abilities that they can risk their life and those of others every day. At the same time they'd also have to be so arrogant that they will put others at risk just because they trust in themselves. Merril has none of these qualities. She's not confident and she doesn't try to be selfish. She is not portrayed as someone that would put others at risk for her own sake. She does not come off of being sure of herself and doubts her abilities on multiple occasions. It makes 0 sense for someone with her personality to practice demonology. Someone ignoring their family and friends in real life is not comparable to a mage endangering entire cities with their stupidity. Pick posted:They're not, really, because in the context of the game you know it doesn't matter because ultimately you can defeat whatever happens. It's just scaling it to real life. This is ridiculously silly. You can't say your comparison works just because of protagonist power, because the people in the game are not aware that Hawke is the player character and thus capable of defeating anything. EDIT: Also I might be okay with one party member being a colossal idiot, but I think when at least two of your other companions do things just as stupid as Merril does it indicates a serious writing problem. Internet Kraken fucked around with this message at 16:00 on Sep 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 15:56
|
|
|
I did think it was bizarre that while you can harp at Merrill for endangering others, you have zero option to say something like, "I don't associate with blood mages", or "blood magic is an abomination", or "I'm reporting you to the templars." The very first time you set eyes on her, she's literally performing blood magic in plain sight and, when questioned, tells you that she's a blood mage consorting with a demon, but it's not bad, really. Unless you're playing Hawke as someone with the extreme outsider viewpoint of blood magic, maybe the single biggest taboo in the entire setting, being a-okay, it makes no sense that you'd follow that encounter up by becoming friends with her. It reads as unreasonable to me: you can safely expect the player to have sympathy for a mage, but teaming them up unconditionally with an open and unapologetic blood mage feels like a huge railroad into a totally illogical decision. I really feel like her predilection to blood magic is something that should come out gradually as you get to know her, rather than intro'ing her as stupid enough to openly practise blood magic in front of armed strangers and then just making the player accept that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 16:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 23:11 |
|
|
You're spending a lot of words refusing to answer the question, which is: what do you, personally, do when one of your friends is on a bad track but can't be dissuaded? Why? You didn't actually address any of those situations. It'd be very simple. "Yes, I support my friends when they follow their dreams because I have hope maybe it'll succeed even if it looks like it won't; heck, I don't know everything." This is the reasoning that determines how you decide to handle Merrill. And it's an interesting conflict because it reflects the reasoning you have to use in real life when dealing with real friends. I know someone at least superficially similar to every DA2 companion. The girl who went to Chicago did not seem overly arrogant, just very optimistic. She just thought her goals would work out if she took a chance. Not "this analogy isn't perfect because demons don't exist  ". Pfft, like demons are a threat to Hawke! She kills one of the three great known demons of the world like it's nothing (Xebenkeck). Tearing down dozens of demons on a loving walk. An abomination is usually as dangerous as a cat. But if you need it, here's an example that isn't from anyone I know: what would you do if one of your friends was dead-set on robbing a bank? What would you say and why? And then doesn't that also apply to your reasoning for disapproving of Merrill's choices?
Pick fucked around with this message at 16:10 on Sep 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2013 16:03
|
|