Dragon Age 2 - Catch All

Malor wrote:

They did the exact same thing in Mass Effect, and people don't really complain about it there.

I did!

But the moral of the story is to just use the presets and ignore the allure of the sliders. Making faces seems like fun, but Bioware's are always higher quality.

Eh. Default Hawke and Shepard never seemed right to me. Shepard's hair, in particular, seemed too long and styled for a soldier. Felt hot and impractical.

How's the PS3 version of this game? Run okay?

Malor wrote:

They did the exact same thing in Mass Effect, and people don't really complain about it there.

I didn't notice because default FemShep didn't look very good to me, so I never wanted to recreate her.

Think I'll try out some of the mods that enable modifying the presets.

Found a mod that adds a customizable preset identical to default FemHawke. So I tweaked her hair color and added a tattoo.

I'm level 7 now and already sick to death of the "Oh you defeated all the enemies so let's spawn just as many from empty space" bullsh*t that happens every fight.

Quintin_Stone wrote:

I'm level 7 now and already sick to death of the "Oh you defeated all the enemies so let's spawn just as many from empty space" bullsh*t that happens every fight.

I hear you. What makes it even more egregious is when they literally appear out of thin air. Like the designers had given up on any attempt at immersion.

"No one, for instance, has found any means of traveling-either over great distances or small ones-beyond putting one foot in front of the other.
The immutable nature of the physical world prevents this"

--From The Lectures of First Enchanter Wenselus.

Yeah right. Another example of different departments not talking to each other?

Haha, this may be the first RPG where I had a threesome.

strangederby wrote:
Quintin_Stone wrote:

I'm level 7 now and already sick to death of the "Oh you defeated all the enemies so let's spawn just as many from empty space" bullsh*t that happens every fight.

I hear you. What makes it even more egregious is when they literally appear out of thin air. Like the designers had given up on any attempt at immersion.

"No one, for instance, has found any means of traveling-either over great distances or small ones-beyond putting one foot in front of the other.
The immutable nature of the physical world prevents this"

--From The Lectures of First Enchanter Wenselus.

Yeah right. Another example of different departments not talking to each other?

One of Merrill's spells allows her to teleport across the battlefield. Stone's Throw in her Dalish specialization.

I confess though that I find "the immutable nature of the physical world" in such a magic-heavy world to be kind of a ridiculous statement.

Quintin_Stone wrote:

Haha, this may be the first RPG where I had a threesome.

Clearly you haven't played Fable, then.

That's true.

Is it weird that reading the Song of Ice and Fire books has left me wanting to replay DA2?

Yes, it probably is.

CptGlanton wrote:

Is it weird that reading the Song of Ice and Fire books has left me wanting to replay DA2?

Yes, it probably is.

Not at all! It's probably the closest to such a dark, twisted plot as you'll find in any videogame today, really. Plus, I do recall the devs mentioning George R. R. Martin's series as inspiration...

I've finished, choosing to protect innocent members of the Circle (since my Femhawke was a mage) but executing Anders for his own murder of innocents in the chantry. In the end, with the role of the idol revealed, I'm satisfied I made the right choice, even if the game ends the same either way.

The game ultimately ends with the Champion leaving Kirkwall, but how she leaves and with whom is entirely driven by player choice. With certain choices, you can end up ruling Kirkwall for a while.

brokenclavicle wrote:
CptGlanton wrote:

Is it weird that reading the Song of Ice and Fire books has left me wanting to replay DA2?

Yes, it probably is.

Not at all! It's probably the closest to such a dark, twisted plot as you'll find in any videogame today, really. Plus, I do recall the devs mentioning George R. R. Martin's series as inspiration...

Crusader Kings 2 is, of course, the real Game of Thrones game, but if you want something with a scripted plot, I'd put The Witcher 2 as being much closer to the murky morality and politics of Game of Thrones...

Alien Love Gardener wrote:
brokenclavicle wrote:
CptGlanton wrote:

Is it weird that reading the Song of Ice and Fire books has left me wanting to replay DA2?

Yes, it probably is.

Not at all! It's probably the closest to such a dark, twisted plot as you'll find in any videogame today, really. Plus, I do recall the devs mentioning George R. R. Martin's series as inspiration...

Crusader Kings 2 is, of course, the real Game of Thrones game, but if you want something with a scripted plot, I'd put The Witcher 2 as being much closer to the murky morality and politics of Game of Thrones...

You may be right, but I have yet to play it so I can't say either way. No educated opinion on it, yet. All I know is the devs mentioned A Song of Ice and Fire as an influence and it shows in some areas.

I got this for $6 from Origin. I'm about 4 hours in, and I'm not sure I'm going to spend much more time with it. It's just so ugly. The combat isn't bad, but the dialogue is as drab as the environments.

Those are necessary set ups and exposition. Most of the people who go gaga over this game go crazy over the story portions. They replay it to get all the stories out, since you can't get then all in one run.

DA:I comes out this year, and I probably will pick it up* (pending review... sad to say that that's what I've come to), and I'm sort of slogging through the beginning of Act 2 (harder and harder with Mario Kart 8 staring at me). This game is the top of my pile....Does the story pick up?

Iridium884 wrote:

DA:I comes out this year, and I probably will pick it up* (pending review... sad to say that that's what I've come to), and I'm sort of slogging through the beginning of Act 2 (harder and harder with Mario Kart 8 staring at me). This game is the top of my pile....Does the story pick up?

The story is very blah. Each Act is basically it's own story that is very very loosely related. And each of those Acts have a very cookie cutter story. You aren't missing much if you don't play it.

The only thing I would say is to definitely read a summary of the events online as there is one thing that happens which is a major setup for Inquisition.

I found the story in Act 1 and 2 workable. Act 3 completely loses its sh*t though, completely wrecks what little positive there was before. If you're finding it a slog now either the end will be so weird you enjoy it, or will infuriate you.

If you are finding it a slog, you are probably in the camp of its just not for you. Seems like the game is really love it or hate it, with very few middle ground people. For myself, I absolutely loved the game and story enough to play through twice back to back. Bit then, I found origins tedious (even though I love BG back in the day), and barely got through it once by making OP all plate mail mage party.

That's broadly appropriate. Many of the threads start coalescing in Act 2. They all feel random and disconnected in Act 1. If you're not getting an inkling of what's going on by the end of Act 2, Act 3 will feel like it came out of nowhere. Which I guess a lot of the Kirkwall residents feel, too.

The exposition at the start, I feel, is crucial. I played the game always thinking, "How is this helping Varric's case?" Surprisingly enough, all the content is relevant to the conclusion. Even the most random seeming sidequest ties in.

I feel that DA2 is one of those things where you need to be actively trying to predict where things are going to get a good experience out of it. In addition, there's a lot of stuff going on under the surface. A lot of WTF happens in Act 3 that won't make sense unless you tackled the relevant prior side quests in Acts 1 and 2 that foreshadow them. In that sense, there really are no side quests in DA2. They're all kind of important to piecing together the ending.

Bertrand's fate is just one of those threads. That happens regardless of whether or not you do the side quest, but you won't know about it unless you unlock the quest and do it.

Is this a subversive game idea? A lot of current game concepts are based on the conceit that the protagonist makes events happen and that all relevant events happen only within the direct influence or at least witness of the primary protagonist. DA2 completely flips that around. Not only does Hawke seem powerless in the maelstrom of politics and power groups that swirl around her, many of the events relevant to the plot can and do happen outside of her personal experience. She does contribute to the turn of events, but it's like holding back a tidal wave.

I don't think it's particularly revolutionary, The Witcher 2 for instance does something very similar. (Although is does it much better, since it feelt like the plot came from the actions of characters, instead of the characters being yanked around and changing on a dime in order to get the plot where they wanted it.)

Generally, I'd say not letting the player get the gist of the story by following the main path is just plain bad storytelling, and there's nothing revolutionary about that. (Although I wouldn't say Dragon Age 2 suffers from that particular brand of bad storytellling.)

Iridium884 wrote:

DA:I comes out this year, and I probably will pick it up* (pending review... sad to say that that's what I've come to), and I'm sort of slogging through the beginning of Act 2 (harder and harder with Mario Kart 8 staring at me). This game is the top of my pile....Does the story pick up?

Yes and no? I kinda enjoy the way sh*t goes down with the Qunari in act 2, it felt like the most coherent bit of storytelling in the game. Plus I just plain like the Qunari. Act 3 turns to dogsh*t though.

The characters actually all progress on predictable paths towards the inevitable conclusion. A lot of people mistakenly think that Orsino's actions don't make any sense, except that between the events of the Mage rebel groups and Hawke's maternal woes, it becomes very obvious that he's not exactly the benevolent peacemaker he's presenting. This is not immediately obvious, but it does make sense.

I'm not sure whether or not it's bad not to hit players over the head with the obvious multiple times over. DA2 is one of the few games that I didn't feel was talking down to me. Most of time, plot points get explicitly explained over and over and foreshadowed and hinted and repeated ad nauseum. Par for the course in most media, but a change of pace in DA2 was refreshing.

There's a lot of very interesting story beats and implied double meanings in DA2's dialogues and animations that take very different meaning based on your actions. DAO's choices rarely affect the actual narrative within the story. The text at the end can change, or a few final sequences can; but for the most part, everyone gets the same story.

DA2 seems like it's like that, but it's not. There were a lot of things I got in subsequent playthroughs wherein I was like, "WTF? That can happen?" In fact, there was a lot of this during the discussion of the game on the Conference Call. Very, very few games do that. It's not very often that people unintentionally spoil the game for each other after everyone's completed it.

LarryC wrote:

The characters actually all progress on predictable paths towards the inevitable conclusion. A lot of people mistakenly think that Orsino's actions don't make any sense, except that between the events of the Mage rebel groups and Hawke's maternal woes, it becomes very obvious that he's not exactly the benevolent peacemaker he's presenting. This is not immediately obvious, but it does make sense.

It's not what he does per se, it is the context in which he does it -- depending the choices you've made -- that turns it from a plausible action to a super-dumb contrivance.

As for belaboring the obvious, DA2 might not belabor its plot, but it sure does hit same two notes in the central conflict again and again and again and again and oh thank god a Qunari story I love you guys. And yeah, the fact that it's a vicious feedback loop is totally the point, but there's no need to make it so thudding and graceless.

It does have a recurring thematic element to its main plot. Mass Effect does, too. It's kind of important to the conclusion. I certainly didn't think it was either thudding or graceless. Each iteration was important to plot advancement, offered more exposition, and had its own nuances.

It's not what he does per se, it is the context in which he does it -- depending the choices you've made -- that turns it from a plausible action to a super-dumb contrivance.

Orsino is his own person with his own things going on. Hawke is really just a peripheral character in his story, so it's not that surprising that Hawke holds little sway over him. It looks like a super-dumb contrivance, I suppose, if the main conceit is that Hawke makes the world go 'round. That's the thing about DA2 that's different. She doesn't. Stuff happens around Hawke without her agency or knowledge. As far as the big players are concerned, she's mainly incidental. Her story is about her family and friends.

LarryC wrote:

Orsino is his own person with his own things going on. Hawke is really just a peripheral character in his story, so it's not that surprising that Hawke holds little sway over him. It looks like a super-dumb contrivance, I suppose, if the main conceit is that Hawke makes the world go 'round. That's the thing about DA2 that's different. She doesn't. Stuff happens around Hawke without her agency or knowledge. As far as the big players are concerned, she's mainly incidental. Her story is about her family and friends.

This! I always try to get people to see this but when it comes to games people just seem to think that everything should function only around the player character. I hear all these complaints about game NPC's not being independent and blah blah blah but when approaches like DA2 come along they just don't seem to get it. I played through the game and not one situation felt particularly forced, rather I loved that things occurred independent of my actions in many cases, especially where I did have some influence but only peripherally so that my actions did exert some changes but not in the way one might usually expect from games.

I still think what Bioware did here was pretty good if not brilliant, though some of the execution in technical regards could definitely have been better.

LarryC wrote:
It's not what he does per se, it is the context in which he does it -- depending the choices you've made -- that turns it from a plausible action to a super-dumb contrivance.

Orsino is his own person with his own things going on. Hawke is really just a peripheral character in his story, so it's not that surprising that Hawke holds little sway over him. It looks like a super-dumb contrivance, I suppose, if the main conceit is that Hawke makes the world go 'round. That's the thing about DA2 that's different. She doesn't. Stuff happens around Hawke without her agency or knowledge. As far as the big players are concerned, she's mainly incidental. Her story is about her family and friends.

It's not a question of the world and characters revolving around and bending to Hawke's, it's a question of characters behaving in a manner consistent to how they and their motivations have previously been established. I.e. not have characters suddenly go I WILL MURDER EVERYTHING STARTING WITH MY ALLIES NOW.

It's almost as if it was a contrivance to create another boss fight or something.

Spoiler:

It was

But whatever, we've been over this before, and I suspect we'll never see eye to eye on this one.

Orsino's paranoia was actually reasonable, all circumstances being what they were, and he had reason to be suspicious particularly of Hawke. Plus, the story wouldn't work right if that event didn't happen. It was also convenient for a boss fight, but it had consistent narrative reasons to be there.

The main problem is, as I said, that many of those motivations and foreshadowings were buried in the side quests. You'd have to open and do nearly all the side quests to really grok all the stuff going on. Is it a weakness that some 80% of all this stuff is optional and even locked away? I dunno. There really is a lot going on, and most of it is important.

I suspected many of the goings on based on how the story unfolded, but this requires a mindset that doesn't immediately jump to "this is stupid."

I feel that it's a gross misrepresentation of the material to say that Act 3 events were inconsistent. They actually flow logically from what's been happening in Acts 1 and 2. You just had to be aware of what's really going on, is all. While Act 2's Qunari arc really has a comfortable, familiar, heroic, nearly formulaic flow to it, even the first time I was playing, it felt very much like a sideshow. As it turns out, it was kind of necessary to what happens later.

What happened at Kirkwall was nothing short of a complete and total disaster. This requires a complete breakdown of multiple organizations, authority structures, and even redundancies. DA2 does do a good job of making that all make sense - better than any disaster material I've ever seen in a game.

It's certainly more mature than "Almighty villain comes along and destroys everything singlehandedly."