Dragon Age Wiki
Register
Advertisement
Dragon Age Wiki
Forums: Index > Game DiscussionAnalyzing the DA writing team
Note: This topic has been unedited for 4426 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not continue it unless it really needs a response.

After reading David Gaider's latest interview I started to think about what the problems with the writing team are. At first, due to some of his comments I thought maybe there were too many women on the writing team but after looking up the writing team and seeing that they were pretty evenly divided number wise, even at some points having more men, I concluded that this is unlikely. At which point it occurred to me that blaming genders was too general and was just as bad as Meredith blaming all mages for the actions of one. Admittedly, I should have seen this sooner. After researching I believe the problem lies in Gaider's apparently poor memory and inability to tell product concepts from final product (likely just due to stress and random headaches) and in the other seemingly predominant writer, Jennifer Hepler. I briefly considered that her pregnancy may have affected her writing but if she's currently on maternity leave then she most likely wasn't pregnant when DA2 was written. Her dislike of combat and video games has likely played a part and caused a few problems. There is also a chance there is some nepotism here as she may be related to Mass Effect writer Chris Hepler.

Certainly writing is not the only problem (EA's corporate greed is still the biggest problem IMO) but it may be one we can help to fix depending on who reads this. I think the writers getting swapped in and out from other projects (such as Mass Effect and Star Wars: The Old Republic) likely causes problems as well. Also I don't think people should make things they wouldn't use themselves. For example, if you have no desire to play the game, you should not be writing it. If you just want to write, be an author. Having people that don't like video games write video games seems to be as stupid as having an atheist perform a religious ceremony. Below is a list of the writers compiled with any DA info I could find out about them. I do this in the hopes that we can isolate and possibly assist in some small way in correcting the problem so DA3 can be more well-written. Though the writers of certain side projects may be of little-to-no importance.


DAO/DAA/DA2 writers: David Gaider, Jennifer Hepler, Sheryl Chee, Mary Kirby, Daniel Erickson, Eric “Ferret” Baudoin, Luke Krisjanson, Jay Turner and a new writer named Tonya (possibly Tonia Laird).

David Gaider wrote Zevran Arainai, Alistair, King Cailan Theirin, Morrigan, Shale, a large part of Warden-Commander Duncan, the Dalish Elf Origin, the Human Noble Origin, ‘the Nature of the Beast’ and ‘Arl of Redcliffe’ in DAO. Nathaniel Howe, Anders and Justice in DAA. Cassandra Pentaghast, Fenris, First Enchanter Orsino and Knight-Commander Meredith Stannard in DA2. He also wrote the books The Stolen Throne, The Calling and Asunder.

Jennifer Hepler wrote most of the dwarven NPCs in Orzammar, the Dwarf Commoner Origin, ‘the Anvil of the Void’, Paragon Branka and Hespith in DAO. Anders/Justice (Vengeance), Bethany Hawke, Leandra Amell, Grand Cleric Elthina, Knight-Captain Cullen, Sebastian Vael, the mage-Templar plot and unnamed DLC in DA2. She is currently on maternity leave. She also dislikes video games and would like an option to skip combat in games as stated in an interview with ‘Killer Betties’ of which I could only find fragments of since the original page doesn’t seem to exist anymore.

Daniel Erickson wrote the City Elf Origin and the Dwarf Noble Origin.

Luke Krisjanson presumably wrote the Prince Bhelen Aeducan/Lord Pyral Harrowmont plot.

Jay Turner wrote the majority of Oghren and side quests (Korcari Wilds, Blackstone Irregulars, Mage’s Collective, etc.). He did not work on DA2.

Mary Kirby wrote Ser Cauthrien, the Sten of the Beresaad, the majority of Teyrn Loghain Mac Tir, the majority of ‘the Chant of Light’ and ‘the Landsmeet’ in DAO. Merrill and Varric Tethras in DA2.

Sheryl Chee wrote Dog, Leliana, Senior Enchanter Wynne, Oghren, Knight-Templar Cullen, the Magi Origin, ‘the Broken Circle’ and ‘the Urn of Sacred Ashes’ in DAO. Oghren, Sigrun and Velanna in DAA. The majority of Isabela in DA2. I'm not sure she understands the meaning of the word 'hobby'.

Felicia Day wrote, produced and starred in Dragon Age: Redemption and played Tallis in the Mark of the Assassin DLC for DA2.

Orson Scott Card and Aaron Johnston wrote the Dragon Age comic.

Penny Arcade artists wrote 2 Dragon Age web comics.

Chris Pramas wrote the plot for the Dragon Age pen and paper RPG.


My solution would be to relax the deadlines, stop shifting writers around and maybe ease in this new writer Tonya (sp?) to replace Jennifer Hepler. Feel free to post any valid info I may not have found as well as your own conclusions and solutions.--Vampire Damian (talk) 22:14, February 2, 2012 (UTC)

David Gaider told that though Jennifer Hepler did write Anders etc in DA2, he himself as a Lead writer decided what the major plot twist and the story in general should be. So if you are dissatisfied with "mages vs templars" with no middle ground, with the Chantry blowing or with Anders being possessed and inevitably going down a slippery slope etc, you are aiming your anger in the wrong direction :) I can find the link if you wish. Asherinka (talk) 22:23, February 2, 2012 (UTC)


Admittedly this is a volatile subject but I think anger will only cloud our judgements. I'm trying to look at things more pragmatically. Gaider is certainly not blameless and Hepler's time off may be a much needed break for someone that has likely been highly stressed and over-emotional. She could come back a better writer. The 2 of them seem to be the primary influences in writing with Sheryl Chee and Mary Kirby being the next highest up. Maybe Gaider just needs some time off too. Think about how much they have done in 3 years and try to consider their perspectives. Thinking about it more now, maybe stress is the only real problem with the writing. That and writing themselves into a corner, which undoubtedly causes more stress. Maybe the writers just need to take some time off and play the games they made. I highly doubt they have considering how long even one playthrough can take and how much they work. That could also be a source of irritation to them, spending so much time making a game that they never get to play it. Still, as I said I welcome more info that could further clarify this mess. I'm sure there's plenty of relevant info I couldn't find. --Vampire Damian (talk) 23:20, February 2, 2012 (UTC)

For more information on Jennifer Helper, check out this link: http://futuremark.yougamers.com/forum/showthread.php?146951-The-Fall-of-Bioware-Thread

It includes some insight into why she does not like combat in video games.

Also, for the original interview at "Killer Betties": http://web.archive.org/web/20061108014108/http://www.killerbetties.com/killer_women_jennifer_hepler?page=0%2C3

Hope that helps! Ionic Nerd (talk) 00:04, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

Err.. I just realized that I totally missed the point of the whole thread. How is liking or disliking combat related to writing at all? O_o I used to think that writers generally have nothing to do with designing game mechanics... Asherinka (talk) 00:17, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

Personally, I can see how a writer's stance towards combat might influence his or her writing. For instance, if a writer thinks that combat in a game is a waste of time, then he or she might write the story in such a way that combat becomes a rarer occurance. Perhaps, for instance, the story could be written so that a "good character" never has to kill absolutely anybody in the entire game; on the other hand, the option to engage in a fight is only given to "evil characters". So, basically, it could happen that anytime that the player chooses a diplomatic dialogue option for Hawke, no combat occurs, but it always occurs for an aggressive dialogue option. It is feasible, and it could be done in such a manner if a writer wished to do so. So, I think that a writer's views on other aspects of a game's design can influence his or her writing. At some level, game's are an integrated whole with story, gameplay (including combat), art design and graphical quality, sound effects and voice acting, etc. all working together and influencing each other to produce the final product. Just my two cents.... Ionic Nerd (talk) 00:42, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
I am pretty sure writers have next to nothing to do with combat. On the contrary, DG said that he did not want Orsino to ever turn on a pro-mage Hawke, he was made to write it as he was told that they needed another boss. And he did not want a mage Hawke to become a blood mage, he was simply informed that they need it from the gameplay perspective. Asherinka (talk) 01:39, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

"also dislikes video games" You know going through the interview this isn't said at all. Also where was it said she wrote the mage-templar plot?(175.39.16.184 (talk) 01:06, February 3, 2012 (UTC))

Her disliking video games (in general, not as a whole) is fairly apparent unless I just misinterpreted her tone. Her writing the Mage-Templar plot is on her Bioware profile page if i remember correctly.

@Ionic Nerd

Thanks for finding a link to that interview that actually works. I still think there might be some nepotism with her husband Chris but It doesn't seem to be significant as she is still a good writer. I'm somewhat curious as to why Gaider wrote the novels and not her. Seems like something she would like to do and it could have given him a chance to rest and sort things out with this tangled web they've weaved. She does pose an interesting idea: Would we still play Dragon Age if there was no combat? But I think that'd be a whole 'nother topic all on it's own. That first link seemed like alot of angry rants but there was still some useful information there.

I think her being 1 of the 2 lead writers might have influenced the people who designed the combat. Her big opposition for combat seems to be rooted in her lack of skill at it. to quote her, "The hardest part about working at bioware writing for the games is having to play them. I'm really bad at them. I can't read the in game maps either." It could be as simple as her asking a friend/co-worker to make things easier on her. She also said she preferred a shorter story, understandably since she has less time to play. These perfectly understandable feelings have to be viewed differently with a writer however because of their influence.

She wanted DA shorter and with simpler combat, DA2 ended up being shorter with simpler combat. Are these 2 things connected? Maybe not, but it seems likely. The lack of options in DA2 seems likely to be Gaider trying to avoid writing himself into a corner yet again, which is also understandable but still created problems. He seems to dismiss the good parts of DAO just because they're more work but quality usually takes time. We need the writing equivalents to Master Wade and Herren, not some generic merchant selling mass-produced crap. Maybe they've been through this already themselves and that's why DA3 has barely even begun production. I sincerely hope they take their time with DA3. Give time for the writers and other staff members to see the effects of their choices. --Vampire Damian (talk) 01:25, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

@ Vampire Damian: Yes, I agree, the first link that I listed devolves into some angry ranting at all things Bioware; but, the first couple of posts might be interesting in trying to understand Mrs. Helper's perspective on video game design and writing. Also, even some of the later posts on that link feature direct forum quotes from David Gaider. Anyway, all of this should be taken with a grain of salt. One forum quote or one interview can not possibly shed light on a writer's complete views towards game design; but, they might give partial insights here and there. You take what the Internet gods give you! Ionic Nerd (talk) 01:42, February 3, 2012 (UTC)


It seems to me that you guys don't understand at all how writers share assignments. A Lead writer writes the plot as a whole. That is why Gaider writes the novels. Writing characters != deciding what role they have in the events. I think it rather boils down to all the dialogue and small things like companion interactions and party reactions. I.e. in case of Anders you must blame JH for his moodiness and DG for his fate and the Chantry.

And no, writers have next to nothing to do with combat. They write a script and give it to VA actors and to the team that develops game mechanics. Those who develop the mechanics make suggestions and if needed alterations to the script are made. Asherinka (talk) 01:39, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

@ Asherinka: I definitely agree that writers are not involved in combat *mechanics*. But, as to when and where combat can and must occur during a game's plot, I think that writers must be involved with that. I mean, who determines (ultimately) whether or not conflict will occur between Side A and Side B? It must be the writers, I believe! Or, am I missing something here? (As for the fight with Orsino, it has been fairly well established that that was due with EA execs wanting another major boss fight. They went over the heads of everyone at Bioware, including the Lead Writer, David Gaider.) All I am suggesting is that writing can influence the *amount* and *frequency* of combat in a video game.
As far as writers sharing assignments, I cannot comment on that. We will probably never know who came up with the overall plot of DA2 (or any game for that matter). For all we know, all the writers sat down together and hashed out the critical plot points as a group. In that case, we can never know who really decided that, for instance, Anders was ALWAYS going to blow up the Chantry and that the player would have no control over this. Also, even though invididual writers are responsible for individual characters, the lead writer still maintains oversight and has to approve any fundamental changes. Ionic Nerd (talk) 01:53, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
They are definitely involved, but I don't think they are responsible for it, so to say. They are responsible for the plot and the dialogue. And I can see absolutely no reason why a writer should like combat mechanics in order to write good stuff.
DG wrote on BSN that it was he who came up with the overall plot, but I'm too lazy to search for the post at the moment( He also wrote some of the characters himself. Asherinka (talk) 02:00, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
@ Asherinka: No, I agree with what you are saying! (Believe it or not!) We really can't hold any writer *responsible* for anything other than writing. It is dangerous and wrong to "scapegoat" anybody, as someone above has already mentioned. But, nevertheless, I am just interested in Mrs. Helper's ideas about games having less combat (or having a "skip" button to allow a player to "jump over" combat sections). That is something that I have been personally contemplating recently: why are so many mainstream, AAA games so focused on combat? Don't get me wrong, I love combat, actually! But, it is interesting to consider this from a game design perspective. So, Mrs. Helper's ideas to that effect sparked my interest in the possible direction that Bioware might be able to take their future games (not necessarily the DA franchise). Anyway, I apologize if I sounded like I was *blaming* or *attacking* Mrs. Helper's writing or her role at Bioware. (I actually like what she did with Anders, more than, say, what was done with other characters by some of the other writers.) Ionic Nerd (talk) 02:06, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
Well. Two confessions: 1. I liked DA2 plot 2. I don't care much for combat in offline rpgs. I just don't get it. There is no wowprogress or something, no competition at all.. why bother? Besides, its ridiculously easy compared to MMOs, especially with the pause. Try doing something much more complex in real time and with 24 idiots.. err, best buddies instead of 3 NPC you can control, really. But that's just me. Don't kill me, please :) Asherinka (talk) 02:18, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

Personally I rather liked most of the things Jennifer Hepler wrote, and there was still combat in Anvil of the Void, plenty in my opinion. You don't have to like the combat aspect of games to know that they're essensial in a video game. I loved the plots they had in DA2, but to me the problems that messed it up were the lack of companion dialogue and a cohesive story, as well as combat flaws and repetitive environments. I know it's human nature to look for a scapegoat, but I really don't think Jennifer Hepler is the best choice. I'd pick EA, it's more fun to pick on big companies anyways ;) 71.218.249.98 (talk) 01:52, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

Just reading a little bit of the Jennifer Hepler comments makes me want to choke her (ok, I wouldn't choke her, but I would call her an idiot.) She makes a comment on Anders' sexuality in DAA and mentions that he talked about promiscuity in the Fereldan Circle. She states that Anders seems open to anything, which I disagree with. He stated that he just wanted a pretty girl and to shoot lightning at fools. He was STRAIGHT. The more you read what she says, the more you see that she is the driving force behind homosexuality and bisexuality in Dragon Age. She sounds like she is using Dragon Age as her platform for preaching about it, to me. She states that Anders had already let what seemed to be a man (Justice) into his very being, sharing a great intimacy with him, so why not share a physical and emotional relationship with a man? Listen Jennifer, I've shared apartments with other guys, and I have close personal relationships with other guys, but there is no chance in hell I would have a man as a sexual partner. I'm a straight guy, no matter how close of a personal understanding I have with another man. No matter how enlightened I am, no matter how liberal I am, I am still a straight guy that desires women. Nothing could change that.

In it's purest form, sex is about procreation. That's why sex exists in the first place. It's only secondary that it is pleasurable. Throughout nature, males are wired to procreate, procreate, procreate. In some instances, males share emotional relationships, but males are primarily wired to reproduce, whether they are snails, frogs, dogs, cattle, monkeys or men. A straight male isn't very likely to just go out and have sex with men just because he's sexually adventurous. Jennifer Hepler writes a male character using a female point of view. She sees intimacy and emotion as the driving factors for sex. I don't want people to think that I believe men are mindless, sex-crazed beasts, and only want physicality. That's not my point. I truly value intimacy and emotion in a relationship, maybe even more than most guys, but males are driven by testosterone. Men are truly driven to reproduce. Any human teenage boy could tell you how powerful that drive can be.

Basically, I think Jennifer Hepler has a warped sense of how most people think. This is a direct quote about ME3 and Shepard's sexuality-

"I highly recommend having a homosexual Shepard in ME3, but even if you don't, you won't be left out-even straight Shepards will accidentally observe an intimate homosexual encounter aboard the Normandy, though obviously you'll have much more fun with a gay Shepard. I think there will be 4 to 6 different possible gay relationships, and I'm pushing the animation team to give them all a unique lovemaking scene."

Ok, seriously. If I'm a straight guy, and I am, I won't feel left out if I don't have a gay relationship. I don't want to stumble upon a gay encounter. It interests me exactly zero percent. Even though she thinks it is obvious, I won't have more fun as a gay Shepard. I don't see having a homosexual relationship as being fun. I don't even find it an interesting experience. I don't care to see animated gay sex. I don't object to people having a gay relationship, I just don't care about it. I try to explain to people that this isn't homophobia. It's disinterest. I don't like tuna fish. It doesn't mean I think tuna fish should be banned, or that it is evil, or even a poor food choice. I just don't like the way it tastes. No matter how much I learn about it, I'll never desire it. I won't ever find the right tuna sandwich that will open my eyes to the greatness of tuna fish.

Sorry for rambling, and hopefully I haven't upset any of our homosexual or bisexual friends. I think everyone has the right to choose what they want out of life, without fear of being persecuted for it, as long as it isn't harmful to others. I think there should be homosexual and bisexual options in our games (assuming relationships are included at all), but I think they should be OPTIONS. Persistent gore was optional in DAO. Why not have a toggle for "persistent homosexuality" or "any sexuality"? Would it be that hard? Would Jennifer feel homosexuality is being treated as "bad" if there was a toggle to turn it off? If so, that's ridiculous.

When I buy a game called Dragon Age, I expect dragons, and magic and combat and a good story. I don't expect disapproval from Anders because I deny his homosexual advances. LVTDUDE (talk) 02:51, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

^This. Why is it that everyone seems to know how to say what I think better than I do? --CommanderCousland (talk) 04:00, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

And, as far as Jennifer Hepler not enjoying the combat and gameplay portions in a game like Dragon Age, and wanting a fast forward button...

Video games started out as simple games with action. Pac Man, Frogger, Centipede, etc. Role playing video games incorporate a story. The story adds to the action of the game. When you skip dialogue, you are still playing a game, with the story removed. If you skip past the game to read the story....YOU SHOULD READ A FUCKING BOOK OR WATCH A MOVIE!!! I'm sorry, was that too harsh? Nah, I don't think so. She's a twit. LVTDUDE (talk) 03:02, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

Oh, and I DO NOT think Jennifer has her job because of nepotism. She does say that her husband, Chris, is now writing at Bioware. Sounds like she worked there first. I think that accusation against her is absolutely baseless, and actually quite a bit sexist. LVTDUDE (talk) 03:05, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

David Gaider. He really has a god-complex going. http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/2360/derv.png I think his attitude is a BIG problem. LVTDUDE (talk) 03:40, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

Umm, I expected a link to post, not the entire forum image. Oh well, if it's too much someone can edit it out. I don't know if this breaks rules or not... LVTDUDE (talk) 03:41, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

The biggest problem with the writing in DA is the same problem ME has, and that's the modular approach to storytelling that Bioware seems to love so much. Could it be that this is a direct consequence of having so many writers? Or does it demonstrate the failure of the lead writer to blend all of these talents together into one tight knit story? I'm leaning towards the latter.

DA2. Your mission? Collect a bunch of people for random reasons (sometimes for no particularly good reason) and then marvel as they have no further part to play in the main plot. Yes, they just sit there gathering dust with the exception of two, maybe three, characters returning to the main plot for the briefest of brief plot points. The individual stories of these characters also never come together, there is no branching path for all plot points to culminate in one final showdown against the big bad, every thread continues along all on its lonesome through to the end of the game. As was said above, there is a distinct lack of cohesive story. Though this is solely opinion, I believe this demonstrates shoddy writing on the part of everyone involved, but mostly the blame lies with the guy who's responsible for making sure that the basic story works. Excuses about EA interference, or "they made us change things so they could add a new boss", should not fly with anyone. It doesn't excuse a complete breakdown in logic when you have a whole world of inspiration to draw from to help you maintain story cohesion and character integrity.

In the extreme case of DA2, our lead writer is a complete failure. Not only is Hawke not relevant to the plot, neither are his companions. They're just a random bunch of strangers running around a city randomly accepting jobs from yet more random people. Even Anders, arguably the most plot relevant character in our party, demonstrates minimal connection to the plot until the eleventh hour, there's no evidence of this great underground mage resistance, there's no hint of a ragtag bunch of rebels egging each other on to culminate in the fall of the chantry, it's just one guy waiting until the last moment to randomly explode a building. Great stuff, right? Writing worthy of awards up the wazoo, right? Except it's really not. DAO made it work somehow, even with all the separate stories, the mission was always there and all the people you meet along the way slot into the main theme of the game despite them sending you on random excursions into the forest or the deep roads. And then we have the next game... The person in charge of making sure the story works is the only one who should be held accountable for its dismal failure, since they are the one who holds the control and should review everything to make sure it works before it is finalized. I really don't know what else to say.

20px-3431068.png Tekka Ijuin | Talk 

04:28, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure Darth Lord Gaider just signed your death warrant. LVTDUDE (talk) 04:34, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

I really don't know why everyone is hating on the DA writing team. And I can't see how anyone can feasibly say Hawke is meaningless to Kirkwall, but that's for another discussion. I'm not sure why this thread was created, except to possibly harp on Ms. Jennifer and Mr. Gaider, both of which are very talented writers and deserve our praise for crafting the DA universe, not the vitriol they have been receiving. My feelings of Anders in DA2 aside, I thought he was very relevant to the plot. In actuality, I thought all of the characters were relevant, in their own way. Fenris was at least as relevant to the plot as Zevran was to DA:O, for example.

I mean, I honestly don't believe that Gaider was out of line in that forum thread, or any of the threads I've seen him in on BSN. You people cannot honestly tell me, and I mean this, that if you work hard on a product, and pour your heart and soul into it, only to have people throw it in your face and tell you it's crap, or worse, you cannot tell me that you wouldn't be just a little, just a little upset. If someone were to come into your place of work and start dictating how they would do your job, you'd tell them to shut the fuck up and get out, especially if you consider them an amateur in your field.

I can't understand why no one looks at things from the writer's perspective, and try for just one moment to understand what they have to deal with. With a short deadline and higher-ups making their decisions for them, I for one am glad that DA2 is as good as it is, which is pretty damned good all things considered. But here I am again, arguing for a game no one seems to like, and for writers no one seems to appreciate, and for a world no one seems to find interesting anymore.Rathian Warrior (talk) 04:51, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

Why assume someone doesn't like Dragon Age anymore just because they have criticisms to make? If we didn't love Dragon Age, we wouldn't still be here, but that doesn't make certain parts of it any less broken. One doesn't have to be a professor of literature to criticize something when simple logic and comprehension are enough. Nor do they need to point in amazement at the giant steaming turd which has just been presented to them and call it an amazing, shiny, golden turd of glory, just to spare the turd maker's feelings.
And: Hawke doesn't influence the plot, the plot influences him. (Because this is Soviet Thedas. Aha.) Fenris has zero relevance to the main plot, Zevran while totally replaceable, at least has connections to Loghain, Howe, and their machinations. Afer getting the DR maps, Anders only matters at the end, for less than five minutes, this is driven home by the fact you can actually kick him out of the party only to have him return right at the very end JUST to blow up the building! You can't get much more eleventh hour plot relevance. After inviting Hawke into the expedition, Varric's usefulness to the plot ends, and he is relegated to the position of inbetween-act-storyteller, which is also a stupid device that ultimately goes nowhere because the interrogation has no relevance to the plot. Isabella's main plot event, the Qunari, still happens with or without her, making her yet another useless brick in your character menu. The only difference her presence makes is whether or not you kill the Arishok. Merrill, Aveline, Fenris, Sebastian, and Sibling, are entirely irrelevant, and the plot would not change if they didn't exist.
20px-3431068.png Tekka Ijuin | Talk 
05:27, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
@ Rathian Warrior: It is always dangerous to make assumptions about what other people are thinking, but if I were forced to venture a guess I would say that a lot of the vitriol that Bioware has received over DA2 (and, specifically, concerning the game's plot and characters) is due to the (paradoxical) fact that those "haters" do actually care a lot about the DA franchise. They care so *much*, in fact, that they absolutely hate it when they feel that Bioware has "messed up" their favorite game series (from their perspectives). Basically, it is the irresistable force meeting the immovable object: Gaider (and Bioware as a whole) is the immovable object, while the "haters" are the irresistable force. It will never end. It all hinges on the differing perspectives. Bioware's employees sacrificed so much time and effort to make DA2 as good as they possibly could (given the difficult circumstances), but then again their fans also sacrifice their time and money to play this game. It's like something out of Heraclitus.... neverending conflict....
Speaking only for myself, I personally enjoy DA2. I do not "hate" it. I do not think that it is a "bad" game in any way, shape, or form. I think that it is, in fact, way above average. But, I also think that it is not quite up to Bioware's prior standards. So, I am often at a loss because I want to let Bioware know that I did like the game, but I also want to provide what I believe to be constructive criticism. But, if I criticize the game in any manner, then the "lovers" are going to attack me, while if I say that I liked anything about it, the "haters" are going to flame me. So, yeah, I do not know what to do anymore. This game has been so polarizing that people who are more towards the "center", such as myself, are often afraid to say anything. Just my two cents.... please don't flame me, bro! Ionic Nerd (talk) 05:35, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
One more thing! I do really want to especially emphasize that I have faith and hope in Bioware! It is true that many people seem to have given up completely on the DA franchise; in fact, some have claimed (whether truthfully or not) that they will no longer have anything to do with Bioware. While I do respect their absolute right to do so, I also personally believe that that is far to harsh and extreme.
Anyway, I think that this topic should focus on providing "constructive criticism" for the DA writing team. That is not to say that we cannot be upfront about stating that we did not like certain things, however. We should be clear on what we think worked and what did not. "Kowtowing" to the "great wisdom" of the "Bioware gods" is not going to help anyone. People should feel free to criticize what they wish, so long as their criticism is more than just: "Bioware is stupid .... BOO HOO HOO". But, thus far, most of the criticism here has not been too extravagant, if you ask me. Some people have a problem with Mrs. Helper's views on romances in the game; others do not like certain characters; etc., etc. I do not think that we have gone overboard... too much! Ionic Nerd (talk) 05:44, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

@Rath: applause @Ion: Say what you would otherwise say. Just try not to attack anyone yourself. @ All haters: If you can do better, go right ahead.

I don't envy the writing team. Writing DAII in the conditions it was written under could not have been easy, and I respect what they have managed to accomplish. Some characters may have seemed irrelevant, but this strikes me as confusing relevance with screen time. Some of the supposedly irrelevant characters in DAII such as Merrill were actually more relevant to the story than a character like Sten from DAO. But people don't complain about Sten being irrelevant. Well, not that I've seen anyway. The only thing that I would really bitch about regarding the writing team is why they ever let the Qunathloshothtallisari creator have a say in anything. ----Isolationistmagi 06:20, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

@ Isolationistmagic: I apologize if anyone thought that I was attacking anybody at Bioware. That was not my intention. I was just trying to post the actual websites that others were referring to regarding certain comments made my Mrs. Helper or Mr. Gaider. Also, what is a "Qunathloshothtallisari", and who created it? Thanks! Ionic Nerd (talk) 06:28, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
Nah, the haters thing was just a general remark, as some are bound to show up. As for Qunathloshothtallisari, she's better known as Tallis, a character written by the actress Felicia Day that happened to be a fan of the franchise. The resulting inconsistencies brought about by her integration have haunted me to this day. Most of them took root for me in the Redemption series. Anyway, Qunathloshothtallisari is a satirical name I use to point out that no one seems to know quite what Tallis is. We know she is qunari, hence "Qun." At the beginning of the Redemption series she has been demoted from tallis "one who solves problems" to athlok, a lowly worker rank. The "athlo" in the name stems from this. At the end of redemption Tallis apparently passes up the opportunity to become Tallis again and instead appears to become Tal-Vashoth. This is where "shoth" comes from. Then, at the start of MotA (canonically set after Redemption), she is Tallis again for some reason. This, plus it being her actual supposed name lends itself to "tallis." Finally, in MotA she is obviously not Tal Vashoth, which makes her Qunari. Hence the "ari" at the end. And there's the complete etymology of Qunathloshothtallisari for you. I tend to use this in place of Tallis. Thinking back on it I put entirely too much time into this sort of thing.

@Forumers: sorry about the digression. ----Isolationistmagi 07:03, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

You're right there. Merrill is more useful to the story than Sten, for about the five seconds it takes her to dispel the Sundermount barrier anyway. So I must challenge you to explain how Merrill has any plot relevance beyond her optional personal storyline.
20px-3431068.png Tekka Ijuin | Talk 
06:46, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
Simple, you cannot complete the game if Merrill does not dispel the barrier. That makes her five seconds extraordinarily important. From a story perspective, Merrill ensures that Flemeth survives being killed by the warden, thus keeping DA's Illusive Man a factor. From there who knows what happens. It's kind of a snowball effect import, but that is still more than Sten can say. This illustrates my point that it is interesting the ways in which people choose to be selective in their criticisms. ----Isolationistmagi 07:03, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
Actually, she is not needed to dispel the barrier. The barrier is needed to show that she is perfectly willing to use blood magic. Other than that, the barrier served no real purpose. LVTDUDE (talk) 21:58, February 11, 2012 (UTC)
Except it was a comparison you raised yourself, and since nobody is or has been defending Sten's uselessness to the plot, it makes it what is known as a Strawman Argument. But the whole Sundermount plot is segregated, so I'm afraid the Merrill = Plot Essential defence doesn't fly with me on that point. The entire Sundermount ordeal is not relevant to Kirkwall in any act, at all, ever. Neither is returning Flemeth from the amulet. If it were to be removed from the game, Kirkwall would still go on exactly as it had, Anders would still have planted the bomb, and the group would still be scratching their collective heads over Orsino's massive breakdown in logic.
20px-3431068.png Tekka Ijuin | Talk 
07:12, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
I was not posting the Sten thing as someone else's point, I was referring back to my point about Sten in a previous post, perhaps I was unclear. No one challenges Sten's uselessness because no one (that I've seen) has asserted that he is useless. Yet he is respectively even more useless to DAO than Merrill arguably was to DAII. DAII is set up so that it absolutely cannot be completed without having at least met her, wheras the warden can go all the way through DAO without ever having heard of STen's existence. Merrill is accused of being useless, Sten is not. I say that Sten is the more popular character based on how much less fire he receives, and that it is in fact Merrill's lack of popularity that causes many to see her as useless. ----Isolationistmagi 22:04, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

@LVTDUDE

re Anders and DAA: This ^^ In case you forgot.
The whole reaction of "straight male gamers" amuses me to no end. Oh, somebody made me a compliment, that's plain awful! What will I do now? :))

@Michael Largness

Merrill's last quest takes place in the very end of Act 3 ~ when you are capturing escaped apostates upon Meredith's/Orsino's request. It does not influence the events directly, but it is quite important to the plot. It shows the dangers of magic perhaps better than anything else in the game. IMHO it is vital, but YourMileageMayVary) Asherinka (talk) 09:18, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
That scene with Anders proves he's got a sense of humor, not that he's gay. All he says is that he doesn't wear robes when he's naked. Just because he says it with a sexy kind of voice just adds to his sexual nature, not his gay nature. If you read into that line and come up with "Anders is gay", then I think that's just wishful thinking. It's not like he asked Nathaniel into his bed. Nathaniel's retort is also one that he would have toward a smart ass, not toward a sexual advance. LVTDUDE (talk) 03:59, February 4, 2012 (UTC)
I'm afraid I must respectfully disagree. While it may show us the dangers of magic and even provoke a lot of emotion, it is not plot essential at all. None of Merrill's quests have bearing on the main story. It is another separate story within a story, if you will. I'm cool with this modular style of storytelling, I really am, it has been done for a very long time. It does not make the main Mages vs Templars plot any less off the rails however.
20px-3431068.png Tekka Ijuin | Talk 
09:24, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
Let's agree to disagree then) Asherinka (talk) 09:48, February 3, 2012 (UTC)


That quote of Hepler about Shepard? Known fake. And likening sexual orientation to persistent gore does no favours to validity of your argument, LTVDUDE, and not only because you can, you know, say "Not interested, sorry" in game. Oh teh horrorz, this bunch of pixels is supposed to be straight! Straight dammit! And not hit on my own bunch of pixels, who is also straight and completely secure in his own sexuality! Help! Help! I'm being repressed! Boo. Fucking. Hoo. Anyway, Gaider had more eloquent answer to such complaints, something about entitled people who are so used to being exclusively catered to that they feel discriminated when facing options. Can't access BSN or any gaming sites that linked it from work, but I believe it's not that hard to find. It never ceases to amaze me how for Dragon Age 2, the plot of which has more holes than Swiss cheese housing a mid-sized mouse colony and story-gameplay segregation that should be in textbooks as a full chapter of "How NOT to do it", it's always buttsex thing that causes the most kerfuffle. I guess it's not a question of why the fuck romances are needed in RPGs at all, right, since I recall you being okay with Isabela shoving her tits onto your screen? Well, in that case woe is you, no empathy from me, deal with it.

Asherinka - for some people (read: me), not fighting along with 24 idiots is a huge pro. ;-) I've read in a lot of places that DA:O's and DA2's combat is very MMO, maybe that's why it feels superfluous to you. All in all, well done combat is fun. And you know what else is fun? When you can avoid most of or even all combat with, no, not a skip button, but your character skills. Good RPGs are known to enable that.

Back on derailed topic - I don't think writers are the people responsible for the loss of quality, and it's unfair to single out Dragon Age team, because Mass Effect 2? Story wise, Dragon Age 2's Siamese twin joined at full retard, and it had mostly different writers. Seriously - Gaider's with the company since BG, and nobody ever shits on that sacred cow, right? Kristjanson was a lead writer of "Jade Empire", a game with consistently good story and tight, coherent plot (well, him and Laidlaw, but I choose to believe his were all good parts where Laidlaw's were all stupid bits, because Laidlaw). While it is known for a writer to start sucking after a period of being good, I don't think it's the case. Now, I wouldn't blame EA only, but the shift of focus is apparent. Story aka "lots of long wurdz and stuff", stats "aka dem scary numbers and math and stuff" are becoming less important to give way to ~*visceral action*~ (button awesome!!! shoot kill kill herpaderp) and ~*cinematic experience*~ (now with even moar lens flare!). Who are responsible for that? Are corporations deliberately shaping tastes of lowest common denominator so that they could deliver what they produce with no effort? Are they just simply satisfying demands and us customers are going, er, simpler on our own? Is "accessible" really synonymous to "stupid" in a game dev lingo? Hell knows, but it's illogical to put all the blame on writers. Dorquemada (talk) 10:15, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

LVTDude it's about options - one of my friends is a gay man and always plays male characters and in DAO you only had one homosexual romance option each for each gender - but what if you saw your character as gay and didn't like Zevren or as a lesbian but didn't like Leilana. My husband played a female character who wanted to romance Morrigan but couldn't (although this makes sense Morrigan strikes me as someone who perhaps wouldn't see the point of sex unless there was a possiblity of procreation happening - although maybe a device where you could woo her as a woman if your friendship and persuasive powers were strong enough). It's interesting that in a discussion with a friend we had a discussion about Leilana - that I felt she was basically gay but also liked men too whereas he felt she was basically straight but had been seduced by Marjalane - we both romanced her in game - me as a woman and my friend as a man. I am straight but I ended up with Leilana because her personality fit best with my Warden's and it wasn't conscious choice - it got to a point where she was interested enough to start things and my Warden - yeah I like her and she's cute - before that my Warden had been to the Pearl and paid for a bloke - so she just evoled for me into being bi. On the other hand - both the Hawke and I played and the one I'm going to play next are straight - fem Hawke was a mage and it seemed natural to be attracted to Anders who is very cute and m Hawke is going to romance Isabella because it looks like an interesting option, it seems a good way of keeping her around after Act II and it seems like the option a guy would go for. So for me - my Warden is bi and my Hawkes straight but it's good the options are there to do otherwise - also it makes sense - Isabella and Anders are anything goes types sexually and Fenris and Merril wide-eyed innocents who could be persuded by anyone of either gender who cared for them enough.

Ser Pedantic 195.194.86.1 (talk) 11:11, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

I am a straight female but I wanted my female Warden to romance Morrigan. And I could not do it( Asherinka (talk) 11:17, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

About the romances... Helper may say all she wants to about homosexuality, people may complain all they want about everyone being bisexual in DA2. Then again, how many female gamers complain, that Morrigan wasn't romanceable by a female character? I was stunned by the sheer numbers. Problem is, that none of DA2 followers are bisexual, they're all hawkesexual. And Varric is crossbowsexual. The fact, that the friendship/rivalry system allows Hawke to mind-control his/her companions, and especially the way they react to it (like rivalmance with Anders, hilarious) is something, that the writing team failed at.-Algol- (talk) 11:28, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

To sorta, kinda try to get this topic back on its original track, I will try to offer some "constructive criticism" about the writing in DA2. I choose to focus on only one single quest - not because I think that it is necessarily representative of the quality of the game's writing as a whole (I do not, in fact, believe this), but just because it really stuck out in my mind as a poorly written quest. Okay, here goes!

Remember the "Magistrate's Orders" secondary quest in Act 1? The one where a Kirkwall magistrate has you track down a mentally ill serial killer, who then turns out to be his own son? Okay, this quest really, really bugged me because of its portrayal of mental illness. If you may recall, the serial killer Kelder kidnaps, abuses, and then kills young elven girls (and only young elven girls). Now, my interpretation of Kelder is that he was actually suffering from a very severe mental illness; he was not possessed by the demons of DA lore (he was not a mage of any sort). In the quest, you ultimately have to choose between killing Kelder for his crimes or letting him go, with the intent that he would return to his father and seek medical help (perhaps from healers in the Circle). Now, if you kill him, then Lia (the elven girl he was about to kill before you show up on the scene) eventually heals from her ordeal and actually ends up joining the City Guard in Act 3 because she felt inspired to stop anyone else from being abused or murdered. Many of your party members strongly approve of killing Kelder, and you receive friendship points for doing so. Now, if you choose to spare Kelder, you receive a letter in Act 2 informing you that he has continued to kill again.

So, what is Bioware trying to tell us with this quest? That it is better to kill those suffering from severe mental illness because otherwise they are too dangerous? This really, really bothered me. Full disclosure: I have also dealt in my real life with mental illnesses - although my problems were very, very minor compared to Kelder was experiencing. I won't say any more about that though. My point is that this quest flew in the face of Bioware's otherwise balanced and tolerant treatment of other minorities (for a video game). Now, look, I am not naive. I know that there have been many people suffering from mental illness who have committed horrible crimes. But, Bioware is forcing the story in such a way that there is absolutely no option in which Kelder is able to receive some sort of treatment for his condition - at least enough treatment so that he does not kill again. The player is forced to either execute Kelder outright or let him go, but if the player lets him go, then the only possible outcome is that he does indeed continuing abusing and murdering innocent people (just like Lia's father warned you that he would).

How would I have dealt with this quest? I think that the player should be able to kill Kelder if they wish to do so. Heck, I did that because (1) I cheated and read the wiki so I knew he would kill again if freed and (2) I wanted the friendship points (I know, I know - I felt terrible immediately after doing that). So, right there, I think that Bioware should not have any friendship or rivalry points associated with this quest; or, Bioware should have made it possible to "convince" your companions to your point-of-view, and then awarded friendship/rivalry based on whether you persuade them to your perspective or not. Now, if you let him go, then I propose that the game would "flip a coin" to see if Kelder gets the treatment he needs or if he kills again. By having the game randomly choose what Kelder ends up doing if freed, Bioware is allowing for two very real facts: sometimes, mental illnesses are not treated and those suffering from them do end up committing crimes because of this; but, sometimes, mental illness are successfully treated and those suffering from them are able to recover. Both of these outcomes have happened - and continue to happen - in real life. Also, since the result is based on the game "flipping a coin" behind the scenes, Bioware would be emphasizing that sometimes there is very little that outsiders can directly control about mental illness. Outsiders can do the best that they can, but ultimately there are many, many extraneous factors that end up determining whether or not a mentally ill individual is able to heal and recover. Hawke is just such an outsider in Kelder's situation. Hawke can try to the best that he can for Kelder, but in the end he would have little control over what exactly happens.

The bottom line is this: I would have really prefered for the writers to have allowed some *chance* for Kelder to have been successfully healed. Just a chance! Bioware does so much for the representation of other minorities in their games, but in this case, I think that the writers really messed up in how mental illness was portrayed. In fact, I distinctly remember a quest in Mass Effect 1 (for a player character with the Survivor background) in which Shepard helps a mentally ill woman receive the medical treatment she needs ("I Remember Me" - http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Citadel:_I_Remember_Me). That was one of those quests that really impressed me! Bioware can write really well about mental illness, but they did not do so in DA2, in my honest opinion. Thanks for reading! Sorry about the large wall of text. Ionic Nerd (talk) 11:31, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

"So, what is Bioware trying to tell us with this quest? That it is better to kill those suffering from severe mental illness because otherwise they are too dangerous? This really, really bothered me." - So, mages, being sent to prison and basically enslavement, because otherwise they are too dangerous, doesn't bother you at all? C'mon, it's a part of a "dark fantasy" setting, the set of morals of a Theodosian differs greatly from yours. How is it a writing team's failure, I just can't understand. Psychiatrists didn't exist during the Middle Ages.-Algol- (talk) 11:42, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
I did not mention mages being enslaved. Yes, that does actually bother me, which is why I almost always side with the mages in both DAO and DA2. And, you know, I thought about the fact that this is supposed to be a dark, quasi-medieval world. But, still, the world of DA actually has better "health-care" than the real world did during the Middle Ages. You would think that someone would be able to help Kelder. I mean, if they can mend broken bone with a single magic spell, then surely *something* might be done for a mentally ill individual. Or, is Bioware trying to have us believe that Kelder was the *first* mentally ill individual in all of Thedas? Seriously? No one had any idea what mental illness was before Kelder, but they can heal the rest of the body by just thinking about it using super-powers?
Also, Kelder does not necessarily need to be cured by a "psychiatrist". He could just recover on his own, you know. Many mentally ill people recover by their own efforts without medication or counseling. No shrinks or drugs needed for them! But, what, Kelder is not even given that chance?
Sorry, but for me personally, that is a failure in writing. An RPG is not like a book or a movie. There are supposed to be multiple options and resolutions based on player choices. I believe that Bioware should have at least allowed a small chance that Kelder got better. It ruined the much celebrated "role-playing" that everyone always talks about when it comes to RPGs, especially Bioware's RPGs. Ionic Nerd (talk) 12:01, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
Yes, exactly. They are trying to say that in the Crapsack World there are no psychologists and the only way to deal with the issue is mercy killing. You feel uncomfortable about it? Welcome to Thedas!)
This is not a failure in writing. It is a feat. "Well, it's not a good story unless the hero dies", remember? :) Sponsored by Varric. You are given the choice to kill him or spare him. But no way are you supposed to make him feel better.
If you want happy endings, why do you play a dark fantasy at all? Bioware never advertised DA as something else. Asherinka (talk) 12:04, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
Look, I am not saying that the end has to be *happy*. That is precisely why I said that the game should roll dice behind the scenes to determine if Kelder gets better or not. And, I have to emphasize once again, Kelder does not need a shrink to heal himself! That is a common misconception about the mentally ill - that they are always either helpless or dangerous or both.
I feel uncomfortable about the plight of the mages, so I try to help them out. Because, let's be honest, if Thedas was the real world during the Middle Ages, do you really think that anyone would care at all about the "freedoms" of the mages? So, why do you get to help the mages with their problems, but I have absolutely no way to help Kelder (or, at least, for Kelder to help himself)? Oh, and I do know what "dark fantasy" is. Please do not talk down to me. If you do not agree with my suggestion, just say so and move on, but don't insult me as if I don't understand what I am talking about. Please. Ionic Nerd (talk) 12:12, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
You see, that's in modern real-life world people have tolerance for mentally ill people. In a "dark fantasy" mentally ill people are either put down like rabid dogs, or become templars. Applying IRL moral values to a fictional universe is invalid. Deal with it.
"An RPG is not like a book or a movie" - DA2 is.
"It ruined the much celebrated "role-playing" that everyone always talks about when it comes to RPGs, especially Bioware's RPGs" - DA2 is more an EA RPG, than BioWare's. Again, we have to deal with it.-Algol- (talk) 12:15, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
But, this is an RPG, so I should be able to apply my real-world morals to it if I want to. I can do exactly that for elven slaves and imprisoned mages. Do you feel uncomfortable about the treatment of the elves in the Tevinter Imperium? Do you feel sorry for Fenris or Anders? Do you try to help them? If yes, then you too are applying real-world morality to this game.
So, please, don't pretend that you are any different from me. Most of the people who play DAO and DA2 apply their real-world morality to their character. I would bet money on that.... Ionic Nerd (talk) 12:18, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
You would lose. Ask the OP of this forum about his "bad Warden" playthrough of DA:O.-Algol- (talk) 12:24, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, but *most* people do apply their real-world morality to *most* of their playthroughs. So, all I am asking is that I be allowed to apply real-world morality in this particular quest. And, like I said above, it is not have to be guaranteed that Kelder gets better. Just have the game roll the dice. But, let there be some small chance that he does so, even if it is by his own efforts. If Bioware wants to improve how minorities are represented in their games, well, here is an example of where improvement can be made. Ionic Nerd (talk) 12:28, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, you have absolutely no way to help Kelder. It is done intentionally. There is no way to save your mother. There is no way to stop Anders. This is the nature of the world and the laws of the genre. You are basically complaining that you are playing a dark fantasy instead of a high fantasy. I think a lot of complaints re DA2 from DAO fans stem from the fact that DAO had more elements of high fantasy (saving the world from the Big Evil) than DA2 (which has none), and those who were asking for something "darker and edgier" in fact do not realize that they want something lighter and brighter)

PS In no ways am I trying to insult you. But I think you do not understand the purpose of the genre. The whole purpose IS to make you uncomfortable. Which DA2 does. Brilliantly. And it is the reason I love it. Asherinka (talk) 12:24, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

All right, I'll bite. It's DARK FANTASY. So, then, why not let me torture mages? Why not have a quest where you help the templars capture and torture a helpless mage? THAT would be dark.....
DA is hardly "dark fantasy". "A Song of Fire and Ice" is dark fantasy. "The Witcher" is dark fantasy. DA is no where near as "dark" as those.
Look, let me reiterate this again: I did not say that Hawke should be able to save Kelder willy-nilly. That is why I recommended that the computer role the dice behind the scenes. Make it really bad odds if you want to. Make it so Kelder almost never gets better. But, if Bioware wants to improve the representation of minorities in their games, then allow for some minuscule chance that things do work out well.
Here is another option Bioware could have chosen. Kelder is freed: (1) he continues to kill; (2) he gets better; (3) he does not get better but kills himself to stop himself from killing any more people. That is fairly dark. 1 out of 3 chances for a happy ending. That dark enough? Ionic Nerd (talk) 12:33, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
Once again with fanfares - DA:O-2 is not dark fantasy. It's high fantasy slapping some corpsepaint on itself and pretending to be one. Dorquemada (talk) 12:35, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
Let's just say it's modern dark fantasy:)-Algol- (talk) 12:43, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
My two cents about so-called "dark fantasy"? If it is too "dark", then it eventually loses its effectiveness. Yes, we get it - it is all grim and evil and lonesome. EMO-NESS REIGNS!!! But, to make the "darkness" distinctive, good writing says that you should occasionally allow for small chances of success. And, in an RPG, this can be easily done with branching story paths.
Want to know how "dark" go awry? Look at Warhammer 40K. That is about as "grim dark" as you can get. So much so, that it quite often trips over itself. It is too overwhelmingly dark. It is overdone. The darkness is best seen with a little light every now and then. (But, still, I love WH40K anyway. Who doesn't love SPEESH MEHREENS???) Ionic Nerd (talk) 12:40, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
"So, then, why not let me torture mages?" - what exact kind of torture are you referring to? You can torture some mages emotionally. Anders, for example, when you're on the rivalry path with him.
"if Bioware wants to improve the representation of minorities in their games, then allow for some minuscule chance that things do work out well" - I find that part very amusing. So, if BioWare introduced same-sex romances in their games, you expect them to represent each and every minority? Be grateful for what you got already. Sometimes people just want too much. Sorry if that was too harsh.-Algol- (talk) 12:42, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
I do NOT expect each and every minority to be represented. NEVER! I firmly believe that every company has the right to include what it wants in its products. BUT, if a minority is included, let's be considerate and thoughtful about it. How about that? If they are going to be included, then let's be thoughtful about it. I did not force Bioware to include a quest with a mentally ill serial killer.
Bioware chose to represent the mentally ill in such a way. So, yes, those who might know about mental illness might not be to happy about it. If you represent a minority in your product, then either do so thoughtfully - or be aware that some people will not be pleased with the design choice.
And, again, I made every effort to ensure that Kelder getting better would be an outcome of low probability. Not guaranteed. That was my suggestion. Make it a low-probability event that Kelder gets better somehow. But, apparently, unless everyone dies all the time in "dark fantasy", it is simply not "dark" enough. Sorry, but I disagree.
And, when I say, "torture" - I mean "torture" using bodily torture implements from the Middle Ages. Inquisition-style. Iron maidens. The rack. Impalement. Is that "dark" enough? I demand that in every Bioware game from now on because they promised me "dark fantasy"!!! (*sarcasm*)
Oh, and checking Bioware's own statements: DA is a "heroic dark fantasy". So, yeah, not just "dark fantasy". Ionic Nerd (talk) 12:48, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
PS Heroic fantasy refers to the fact that it is not an epic scale one but rather a personal story. Oh, well, I'm gone, yes, yes)) Asherinka (talk) 12:51, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
"I did not force Bioware to include a quest with a mentally ill serial killer" - and yet you force them to resolve this quest the very same way you want to? Look, this gets us nowhere. If Kelder quest was the biggest problem with DA2, this thread (and many others) wouldn't even exist.-Algol- (talk) 12:58, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
I am forcing Bioware to give me the *possibility* - the chance - (however slight) of resolving it in my own way. That is role-playing with multiple branching story paths. And, like I said, (and you and others continue to ignore) a dice-rolling mechanism would make it a low-probability outcome. I do not want Kelder to be cured willy-nilly.
Consider the quest where you can hire the elven slave to work for you (Fenris' quest: Act 2). You can keep her as a slave, hire her as a paid servant, or let her go on her own (with some money or without anything). THAT was well done. Why was something like that not done for Kelder's quest?
You are right about one thing, though. This gets us nowhere. I claim that this quest sets a bad example for the representation of a real-world minority in Bioware's games. Ionic Nerd (talk) 13:08, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

Witcher 2 as a game is a real shame to me. They had an epic choice in the end: save Triss (your lover) and kill Anais (the king's daughter => chaos in the kingdom) or vice versa, effectively clashing your personal feeling with your obligations to the world. You know what, people started complaining. And they "fixed" it early in development. If you save Triss, another character saves Anais. If you save Anais, yet another character saves Triss. Everybody is happy and no one sees that you actually have no choice at all. Gosh, if there were no Geralt, they both would be saved anyway.

It is very sad to read all the discussions to be honest, because some people don't want anything harsh and emotionally taxing to happen to them in-game. I think I'll refrain from further discussion in this thread and agree to disagree with all of you :) Sorry to bother. Asherinka (talk) 12:43, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

Oh please please drop the passive-agressive binary condescencion (if you hate this game it's because you want sweet candies and do not understand dark fantasy! There cannot be any other reasons at all lalalala not listening), will you? Yes! We do want harsh and emotionally taxing! We honestly want! We (who's those 'we' anyway?) just don't think Dragon Age 2 has it! Dorquemada (talk) 12:53, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
In no way do I want to imply that it is the only reason. But when I see a comment like "Kelder must be cured because I want him to" I do think it is the reason. Please, take no offence) I'm too passionate at times)
And let me go! I don't want to argue any more, really :) Asherinka (talk) 12:56, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, but I just to set the record for that I suggested. I did not say that "Kelder must be cured because I want him to". I just wished that there had been some random, chance event for him to do have done so. That is why I specifically included the idea of the game "rolling the dice" behind the scenes. It preserves the "darkness" of Kelder dying in most of the different outcome scenarios. But, in one scenario, he does not. I am not forcing all player's to cure Kelder magically in their game. Bioware *could* have done that if they wanted: Anders could just cast a magic healing spell, and *poof* Kelder is perfectly cured now. But, I intentionally did not say anything of the sort.
Please just say this: "Ionic Nerd, I did not like your idea because I do not think it is good." But, please do not tell me that I do not understand the "dark fantasy" genre. Or, that I am asking for too much regarding the representation of minorities. Bioware chose to have a mentally ill serial killer in their game. Well, I think they should have considered more options for how that quest could end. Not just the "dark" way. Ionic Nerd (talk) 13:03, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
Ok. Ionic Nerd, I did not like your idea because I do not think it is good. Peace? :) Asherinka (talk) 13:05, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
Yes, peace. Or, as the Catholics would have said during the Middle Ages, PAX VOBISCUM!!!
Sorry this got so heated. I apologize for the bitterness on my part. Ionic Nerd (talk) 13:10, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
Me too. Asherinka (talk) 13:11, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
Just wanted to add my 2 cents regarding Kelder. I disagree with the notion that because DA2 is "dark fantasy" that means the quest must end badly. However, that doesn't mean the option to cure Kelder should be included. My primary reason for this is that if you do free him, he comes back under his father's control. His father doesn't believe he can be cured and doesn't attempt to cure him, he just covers up Kelder's crimes. There is no potential for Kelder to receive help in that scenario, even if there was such a thing as treatment for mental illness in Thedas, which I sincerely doubt. Seems to me they're only just possibly up to electroshock therapy. The closest thing to a psychologist would be the local revered mother, and I don't see x amount of repetitions of the Chant of Light as particularly helpful in this case.
Nor is there motivation for him to stop raping and killing. Perhaps there could've been an option for him to kill himself, but what would motivate him to do so? He can comfortably keep telling himself the "demons" make him do it. And if he's forced to do it, he doesn't have to feel guilty, and I don't see how that mindset would lead him to stop.
I realize that if you see Kelder as an example of everyone suffering from a mental illness, this rankles. But I don't think he's supposed to be. While he clearly has some form of mental illness, it seems to be a type that manifests exclusively as a desire to commit violence toward others. As I'm neither a doctor nor a psychologist, I'm unsure to what extent Kelder could be expected to "will" himself to stop his behavior. Or even excercise any control at all over his impulses in the way some people learn to manage for example bipolar disorder.
Considering all of the above, I don't see how Kelder could realistically be expected to stop unless he's killed. And I think the writers made the correct decision in not allowing for that possibility. Kestrella (talk) 14:13, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
I have to admit that one thing that I did like about the writing of the quest was that Kelder *asked* (nay, begged) to be killed. I am kinda unsure why exactly. Maybe I just found it to be very poignant. It was as if he knew that what he was doing was wrong, but he also knew that he could not stop himself and that no one else would really be able to help him out. So, he begged to be mercifully killed - for both his sake and the sake of any potential future victims of his (and perhaps for his ungrateful father's sake as well).
A lot of people with really severe mental illness (similar to what Kelder might have had, if it had been somehow in our real world) do become suicidal in that way. I guess that I am an eternal optimist about this, though, which is why I was so insistent that there be some small chance that Kelder might be cured (maybe by his own efforts and all that). Oh, well, different perspectives on mental illness and how it can be treated.... given the circumstances.... Ionic Nerd (talk) 14:34, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, but I want to add just one last thing. A *positive* thing! Since I was so negative earlier, I want to end on a *positive* note about the writing in DA2. One thing that I thought Bioware did well in DA2 (and DAO for that matter, but in other respects) was that *majorities* were just as well represented as the *minorities*. That is easy to lose sight of all too often. Some people think that including minorities in games has to always come at the exclusive expense of majorities. Some sort of "Robin Hood"-style thing where Bioware takes from the "rich" (those majorities that are well represented in gaming culture) and gives to the "poor" (those minorities that are generally not well represented in most games). That is not true! And I would never support such a maneuver in any video game (or other media). I am a member of a minority in some respects, but a member of another majority in other respects. It would be deeply hypocritical for me to support the inclusion of minorities in Bioware's games, but to deny equal inclusion to majorities. So, for instance, Bioware did make a sincere effort to include the same number of romance options for heterosexual females, heterosexual males, homosexual females, and homosexual males in DA2. They did not try to make it uneven in any way. I respect that. I wish more companies did that as consistently and as sincerely as Bioware has with DA2. *Major kudos* to the writers at Bioware for this equality. Ionic Nerd (talk) 14:20, February 3, 2012 (UTC)


On players personal morals: Most of the time, I personally try to imagine what the character would do rather than me. It is a role-playing game after all. A players morals can be just as varied as a characters. Most of the things I did with my 'evil' HN Warden were just to see how much crap people would put up with. If my DE Warden had been there, he would have attacked him as soon as he said 'kill the elves'. Not sure who would survive that encounter. A Dalish elf would most likely not make the same decisions in Thedas as a human noble and a Chinese Buddhist in our world would most likely not make the same decisions as an American Christian. Christianity would probably even be a fairly unknown thing in China. Not sure but I think China is one of many countries where Christianity is outlawed.

As far as the romances and the orientation of comrades goes, It was the ones you couldn't have a relationship with, no matter what that bugged me. I am a straight male but I have absolutely no problem with people/characters who are of gay/bi. What I don't agree with is a group who think a gay companion hitting on you and you rejecting them ending in gaining rivalry points is offensive. Given that it didn't seem to be a problem in DAO I would guess it's because the 'approval/disapproval' meter was replaced by the 'friend/rival' meter. But nevertheless they started a petition to fire Gaider over something that I think they blew waaay out of proportion. From what I have seen if the writers were offensive to anybody it was likely unintentional. Like what an elven warden can say in a conversation with Leliana. Something like 'you may not be cruel but you still view us differently whether you realize it or not'. DA2 wasn't exactly even as far as companion orientation goes. Anders, Isabela, Fenris and Merrill are bi and Sebastian is straight and chaste. DAO was more even. To be fair, there have been no gay companions. Alistair and Morrigan were straight, and Zevran and Leliana were bi. Making them all bi does seem like a good middle ground but it creates it's own problems.

I'm not sure the mentally ill are a minority anymore. These days who doesn't have some kind of retardation, syndrome or disorder? I think it's partially due to people in general casually dismissing emotions by calling them things like disorders/syndromes. No ones just sad anymore, they have some kind of depressive disorder. Would you say that there are serial rapists/killers that aren't mentally ill? As far as what would make him kill himself, maybe the same thing that made him rape/kill those girls. Healing spells might not work either, though that doesn't mean they shouldn't have tried. Best outcome if he was 'cured' of his madness I think would be him realizing what he's done, accepting responsibility for it and killing himself, similar to what Anders/Vengeance did after blowing up the Chantry.

If I have offended anybody, then I apologize as that was not my intent. I appreciate what the writers have done but they're not perfect. I realize it's gotta be hard to write so much in such a short time period and attempt to have everything fit together right. I'm just hoping we can help them figure things out.--Vampire Damian (talk) 14:56, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

TOTALLY forgot about Sebastian's romance. Hmmm, yeah, so I completely messed up. It is not quite balanced anymore, I guess. Sebastian must have slipped my mind because he was a DLC character. Or, maybe I just find him "forgettable", for some reason.
I would agree that are certainly rapists/murderers/thieves/etc. who are NOT mentally ill. I guess my perspective on the whole thing was that Kelder said he was "hearing" demons that "made" him do things, but he was not demonically possessed according to DA lore (not a mage; and I think Anders or maybe Merrill confirms that there is no spirit inside him - maybe, can't remember now exactly). That sounded to me like the standard interpretation of mental illness before the mid-19th century - that it is demonic or spiritual possession. Also, when he said that he could not stop, that also raised red flags for me that he was mentally ill, in the full medical meaning of the term. Most mentally ill people try to change their behavior (whatever it might be), but cannot, despite repeated attempts over time. For instance, people who are clinical depressed are "sad" repeatedly, seemingly regardless of circumstances; whereas, people who are "just sad" are often like this because of a specific circumstance, and once that circumstance changes, they are no longer sad.
One mistake that I did make in the argument above was that I assumed that Kelder is supposed to represent all mentally ill individuals (and that this was Bioware's express intent). But, like Kestrella said above, maybe he was just supposed to represent a very extreme form of mental illness. But, then again, it was common until very recently to lump all mental illness together, regardless of intensity or duration. So, hmmm, maybe my intense reaction to Kelder's quest is due to my own personal experience with mental illness. Too close to it, I guess..... Ionic Nerd (talk) 15:16, February 3, 2012 (UTC)
Alot of people seem to find Sebastian either annoying or forgettable.

I think it largely depends on what caused Kelder's condition. Birth defect, brain damage or maybe lyrium? especially if he somehow got some red lyrium. His father was a magister wasn't he? Maybe he experimented on his son. Or maybe it's just another Kirkwall driving people crazy thing. The veil is thin and demons can easily avoid detection with blood magic similar to Cole, so maybe he is possessed, though it doesn't seem like the behavior of any currently known demon. Perhaps some kind of despair demon. Demons are a popular scapegoat in Thedas though. I think his father was messing with his head personally. No idea why he would though. --Vampire Damian (talk) 15:54, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

Kelder's father was a "magistrate", not a "magister". Lol! No worries! But, who knows, maybe he was secretly a "magister" as well... a "magister magistrate".... that name alone would make someone go insane.... :) (kidding of course!) Ionic Nerd (talk) 16:08, February 3, 2012 (UTC)


I was thinking magistrate was another mage rank. specifically leader of a group of magisters. If that were the case it would also make him a Tevinter as only they still have that rank. Damn brain jumbling words. --Vampire Damian (talk) 16:54, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

I am really sorry if this has been said because I really can't go through all this comments, just the inital post, on the first line did you say that the problem with the writing team was that their were too many woman on it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shepard-commander (talkcontribs) 13:40, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

I thought that at first, yes but realized that wasn't the problem and have since been trying to figure it out and how to fix it. Best ideas I've been able to come up with are giving the writers some time off, relaxing deadlines and having a little more quality control. Removing EA from the picture would most likely help too but I highly doubt that'll happen unfortunately.--Vampire Damian (talk) 16:54, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

I'm so proud of myself for reading all of that above! But, just to put in my 2 cents; I've always thought Ms. Hamburger was at fault for some of the things in DA2 that made me go WTFJusHappened? And, I've said this before and I'll say it again! There's was too many chiefs and not enough Indians. I don't think the DA2 team had enough well...team effort going on. Like everybody was allowed to do their own thing. So, Laidlaw needs to grow some nads! Maybe that was a little mean, but the dude should have put his foot down! --High Kicks (talk) 16:24, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

Now, that _was_ an extensive read :-)

As I see it, the problem possibly has two parts: writing and communication. The former definitely goes to Gaider as the lead writer - from the point of story management, The Stolen Throne had problems in the narrative development, especially the finale, and this was very much true about DA2, as well. While I can understand, to a certain extent, that Gaider got overly defensive when facing harsh criticism from fans, I can't help but wonder how he responds to criticism from his own team (and if there is anyone able, or willing, to provide any). I do admire, and always will, the way he wrote Alistair or Morrigan, but I think that he is better at writing characters than a story as such. - Mind you, having great ideas for a story does not automatically mean that one is also able to write it.

The problem of communication keeps peeping out every now and then. Party members do not reflect the fact that Hawke is a blood mage, because at the time of writing, the writers didn't know if the specialisation would be there or not? Orsino going Harvester because no-one told them that another boss fight was needed? Kirkwall teems with bloodmages not so much because of the Enigma but because more mage fights were needed? WTF? I won't pretend I know how games are produced but this seems simply wrong to me. The development of the story and the game mechanics should go hand in hand. I'm not sure if this can be attributed to the lack of time; rather, I think someone was not doing his job right - would that be Laidlaw as the lead designer?

Either way, I do hope they will get enough time for DA3 and that these problems will be solved. I'm trying not to be too optimistic, though: the disappointment would hit harder. --Ygrain (talk) 17:21, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

In response to the Kelder quest; honestly, what bothered me was that killing him had no repercussions whatsoever - despite the magistrate vowing revenge - or, conversely, that letting him live had no effect (no quest in act 2 to stop him again, no options to ask a favor of the magistrate, nothing).

Now, back to the thread. Here's my opinions of the writers;

  • I loved Hepler's work in DAO, so I do think she's a good writer (the Leske betrayal came out of nowhere, but that's just a minor gripe). But I did find it odd that she went from doing dwarven stuff in DAO to mage-templar-chantry in DA2. I don't know if this might have had an effect or not, but I did find her DA2 stuff much less impressive (Anders never shut up and didn't even try to pretend that he was the same character, Bethany was just bland, Sebastian was boring), though I actually don't have any real complaints about the side characters - Leandra, Elthina, Cullen etc. (maybe that's the problem; she might not be used to writing major characters). The Mage-Templar plot was also badly composed and executed, but I don't know if that's more Gaider's or her fault (heck, the game's executives might be a bit to blame too).
  • As with Hepler, I have no real complaints about Gaider's writing in DAO (though Morrigan felt like a token evil teammate rather than a pragmatic anti-hero at times), and to his credit, Fenris was better than Anders, even if he didn't have any plot relevance (but I often couldn't get behind the voice; it wasn't bad, it's just like the VA was trying too hard at times). That said, he utterly failed with Meredith and Orsino, in my opinion. To be fair though, maybe it was because of time constraints preventing him from developing them effectively, but even I could come up with an answer to that problem; have them appear in the other acts (no, I don't count Hawke taking on Orsino's appearance in the fade as an appearance - especially since nobody would know who the hell he was unless you read ahead on the wiki)! Would that have been so damned hard?
  • Kirby I have no real complaints about in either game; Varric and Merrill were my favorite characters in DA2, and Sten, Loghain and the landsmeet were good too.
  • Sheryl's writing was also great in DAO for the most part (are we starting to see a pattern here...?); Leliana, Dog and Sigrun were darn enjoyable characters, and Wynne and Cullen weren't really bad either. The Mage origin was the least interesting of the origins and Broken Circle got boring during the fade portion, but that's mostly out of a gameplay perspective. But I feel like she started to get worse after DAO; Velanna was too needlessly bitchy (to be fair, DAA was so short that we didn't get to see much of her good sides), Oghren in DAA felt a little exaggerated at times (but he was still hilarious), and Isabela...I'm sorry, but way too much focus was put on sex jokes and how much she likes sex in DA2. In DAO, I got a Jack Sparrow/Han Solo vibe from her; a thieving scoundrel with some nice traits, who happened to like kinky sex. But in DA2 it just feels like she's a desperate sex addict with the occasional funny commentary and good moments. She just wasn't that interesting. And why the hell did she wait 3 years to bed Hawke if she likes sex so much? Consistency, please.
  • Erickson was great; City elf and Dwarf noble were my favorite origins. No complaint (I wonder why he didn't work on DA2 - or, if he did, what exactly he did).
  • I had no complaints about the Orzammar succession crisis plotline, and I actually like Carver, so Luke gets thumbs-up from me.
  • Liked Oghren in origins, so Turner gets no bad rep. Most of the listed sidequests were interesting too. Unfortunate he didn't get to work on DA2.
  • I haven't played MoTA, and I got so bugged by the first episode of Redemption that I didn't watch the rest of it, so I can't really comment on Felicia Day. That said, the impression I get from MoTA by watching cutscenes on youtube and reading the party banter on the wiki is that there's too much Tallis worship going on in it. That can't really be blamed on Day, though.
  • Haven't read the comic, so I can't comment on Card and Johnston.
  • The penny arcade comics were okay. Nothing to complain about, but not anything to really praise either.
  • Don't know anything about the pen and paper RPG.

So, there does seem to be a connection between the writing quality and DA2 (and DAA, to some extent). Most likely, it's like others have said because of time constraints; things would've been executed better if they had more time to hammer out the stories and the characters. Alternately, they tried harder to tell a different kind of story, which doesn't mesh together well with the game (a story like DA2's requires less combat and more focus on non-combat abilities, not the other way around). Maybe it's both. Whatever the reason, I know they are talented people; I really hope they get better in DA3. Matt-256 (talk) 17:39, February 3, 2012 (UTC)


This clip is my response to the original post: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzhbyCaBaIM&feature=related 123.2.70.12 (talk) 02:55, February 4, 2012 (UTC)

As a writer of fantasy novels I primarily focus on the story-telling rather than combat tactics/gameplay for fantasy games, and overall my opinion on DAII was just that it was far too rushed in the development stage and therefore came out half-baked. The story is generally moved forward by the characters, but in DAII the characters fell flat and felt very two-dimensional. Compared to DAO's characters, which were all very rounded and dynamic (Alistair isn't a knight with a stick up his rear end, Zevran has a soft spot, e.t.c.), the characters in DAII were very linear. As this was all across the board, I can't blame one writer without blaming them all. It felt as if the writers themselves didn't really know the characters as well as they did for DAO; Gaider probably knows what kind of cheese Alistair likes, but I have a gut feeling he may not know what Fenris' favourite food is.

Another problem in general was that it is never clear why any of the DAII companions follow Hawke. In DAO, each character's reason was clear, whether it be faith, utility, common goal, boredom, or honour. In DAII, I often wonder why Aveline sees any necessity to go out and risk her life for my Hawke, or why Fenris bothers traipsing around Hawke when he clearly has better things to do (like, clean his house. At the end of Act III he still had dead bodies on the floor. That's not my idea of good interior decor). Why would Anders follow a Templar-sympathiser Hawke? Why would Fenris risk his life for a mage Hawke? Makes no sense, and there aren't any clues. In fact, many of the things Hawke does doesn't have much reason to begin with. We have no idea (apart from financial benefits) why Hawke went into the Deep Roads, or (s)he bothered with the Qunari problem, or why (s)he got involved with the Templars/Mages. With the Warden it was part duty, part necessity, the sense being "Alistair and I are the only ones who can do this, and even if I run for the hills I can't outrun the Blight". With Hawke, (s)he could have barricaded him/herself in the mansion, or not taken sides with the final dissent. This is probably why the story feels like the climax was just for climax's sake.

I think the writing team needed much more time to make DAII a tale worth telling, to round out each characters, to give purpose to the choices and events. Overall, everything seemed very random at best. --GabrielleduVent (talk) 05:16, February 4, 2012 (UTC)

Err.. can't people have other reasons than duty and necessity? I thought the whole idea is that Hawke is caught in the conflicts around him/her.
As for Aveline, she owes Hawke her life. With somebody like Aveline with strong sense of honour it is a valid reason. I like this scene.
As for Zevran, I have absolutely no clue why he is following the Warden. It makes no sense to me. Asherinka (talk) 11:25, February 4, 2012 (UTC)
I can perfectly understand Zevran's reasoning; what I don't get is why the Warden should want him around - I sure didn't. - Which is also one of the big advantages of Origins: you don't have to hang around people whom you dislike. In DA2, I HAD to take Merril to the party to do the Flemeth quest, which I HAD to do because the journal said I had to, without any reason at all why I should bother. After the quest, I parked her in the Alienage and NEVER talked to her, not once, until she suddenly appeared in the finale to voice her unasked opinions about Anders. W.T.F. PLease, let me CHOOSE my companions, don't force them on me.--Ygrain (talk) 20:52, February 4, 2012 (UTC)
I can also understand Zevran, although I found him a bit creepy at times (he hits on WYNNE. I mean, come on). I kept him around because I didn't have another rogue at my disposal who could do close combat. That, and Alistair got beaten up far too often. That man is like Aragorn in battle-style; they think shouting and jumping off the parapet/charging in will do the trick. No, blondie, that won't do.

As for reasons to follow Hawke, I would have accepted anything. Honour is a common one, as well as duty, but greed (Varric or Isabela would have suited), boredom (Fenris), or common goal would have been good. In DAO, whenever Warden did something it was either approved, or disapproved, and in some cases that may result in death (defiling the ashes, for example). In DA2, I can be a Templar loyalist who thinks mages should be butchered and fed to Mabari, and Anders still follows me. I know it's just for the sake of game machination, but having Anders trail around a Templar sympathiser of epic proportions and then blow up the Chantry was one of the big "WTF was that" moments. In DAO, each character had a solid reason that was strong enough to die for. The only ones I can see in DA2 that this applies are the mages; I have no idea why Isabela is willing to die for my non-romanced, lukewarm relationship Hawke. If I were Isabela I'd just tell Hawke to sod off and stay in The Hanged Man, safe and (maybe) warm.

In this sense, DAO can be easily novelised. DA2, on the other hand, requires a very particular playthrough; if Hawke was a mage sympathiser, it would be a bit difficult to be with Fenris, for example. --GabrielleduVent (talk) 07:48, February 5, 2012 (UTC)

Basically they need to re-hire Jay Turner, after 'playing' through all those waste of C++ style side quests, such as found trousers, found trash, returned ring etc. Who else missed the detailed side quest/sub plots like the 'cross-cut drifters', 'blackstone irregulars', 'red jenny' etc, that just added to the detail and lore that DA2 was frankly missing to a great extent. James Ward1987 (talk) 22:06, February 4, 2012 (UTC)


Honestly, WTF do people expect when a game is rushed and the demands of game dynamics and graphics have to be taken into account as much as the script? One of the BEST stories in video games ever is the Legacy of Kain series and the gameplay is utter rubbish. It was not popular as a franchise at all. So - we get a half decent story and good gameplay and what do we do? Effing criticise. Or ya know, blame the pregnant chick. 94.168.50.250 (talk) 21:03, February 4, 2012 (UTC)

I paid flawless money for a flawed product. And I sure don't pat my students on the shoulder when they hand in a rushed, unpolished essay because they were short of time.--Ygrain (talk) 21:43, February 4, 2012 (UTC)

Granted I didn't read all of the replies, I read enough and the original post to still be thoroughly confused on what the point is of this post? What is trying to be achieved here? As much as I can tell so far the most that got decided was that Hepler doesn't like combat...which I've heard and seen before, so no biggie there...however I doubt that really seriously has much any effect on the game because she isn't the lead writer and she probably doesn't handle anything that requires writing in combat as a result. Most of the replies seem to have nothing to do with the topic and I don't even get what the point of the topic is... "why the OP thinks the writing team began to suck" maybe?Xelestial (talk) 08:01, February 5, 2012 (UTC)

Maybe you could give us your opinion regarding this subject, since you have met DG in person. You see, almost everyone agrees that DA2 writing was much weaker than its predecessor (not that DA2 wasn't an enjoyable game as well). Viktoria Landers (talk) 08:46, February 5, 2012 (UTC)
Actually, I haven't met him in person. I know what you're thinking though- it's because of the blogs I posted. I found those interviews from other people. I really wish I had met him in person. Maybe one day, but sorry for any confusion those blogs may have caused. Is that the point of the post though? I'm just really trying to understand it. "Why DA2 had weaker writing?" I also don't know if I believe it had weaker writing. It really depends on what aspect of the writing we are looking at. Xelestial (talk) 08:50, February 5, 2012 (UTC)
I think the popular opinion is that DA2 had better combat, but it had less story to tell. DAO was significantly more epic in its storytelling, and there were certainly more heart-wrenching moments that dealt with much heavier topics (rape, for instance). DAO would have made a much better movie, for example. DA2 is certainly enjoyable, but I don't know too many people who replayed DA2 many times. Most of the players I know have replayed DAO at least twice (the option to kill yourself was new and quite refreshing). DAO has been expanded by many fans to include Ser Gilmore as a companion, extended scenes of romance, e.t.c. It has received lots of lurve.
This is pretty off topic, but I actually think that DA2 would make a better movie than Origins (and for the record, I prefer Origins). To be a movie, Origins would have to cut a lot of stuff out, and it would probably end up being a pretty standard epic fantasy movie. Plus they would have to remove most of the choices etc. I think DA2's immigrant rise to power plot-line in a fantasy setting would make for a much more interesting movie (or series), and especially works because unlike Origins, its has already been narrowed down to a smaller world, and a specific character. Hell, now that I think about it, I wish DA2 had been made into a movie or series rather than a game. --Liam Sionnach (talk) 05:44, February 12, 2012 (UTC)

In my creative writing classes, the lesson I learned was that people want to see drama which is created from a single, tiny mistake, a small misunderstanding, and such. Think about it: all the origin stories had them. All the possible Wardens were driven by fate to either die or go to Ostagar (and consequently almost die). it had a grander sense of drama and helplessness as the Warden risked his/her life time and time again for a task that seemed almost impossible.

Hawke, on the other hand, makes a lot of choices. (s)he chooses to go down to the Deep Roads; it wasn't "go to Deep Roads or die" kind of a choice. In that sense, it almost felt to me that Hawke chose to go down his/her path, while the Warden was forced on it. And if you think about it, all the epic fantasy novels (LoTR, for instance) have main characters that are forced down that path. Which is probably why when you finished DAO, there were moments you just wanted to relive and redo.

Are the characters in DA2 not as well written? Of course not. I liked seeing Cullen evolve from the zealot to the only Templar in the entire Kirkwall who knew what duty was but also what the Templar Order is truly supposed to stand for. Anders truly broke my heart (damn you, Anders). But in the grand scheme of things, DAO just had more of "damn, that was a good story". This may be attributed to Hawke him/herself, and just the general flow of the story. But it is undeniable that DA2 was half-baked on the storyboard, while DAO received loving attention from the writers for much longer time.--GabrielleduVent (talk) 00:07, February 6, 2012 (UTC)

"I liked seeing Cullen evolve from the zealot to the only Templar in the entire Kirkwall who knew what duty was but also what the Templar Order is truly supposed to stand for" - I profoundly disagree. Zealots do not evolve that way, unless some mage casts a "Cure Insanity" spell on them. Cullen wasn't even supposed to be in the game, but the devs decided to include him only because of the sheer number of his fangirls. "The only Templar in Kirkwall, who knew his duty" was Thrask. And Cullen was a blatant fanservice.-Algol- (talk) 07:19, February 6, 2012 (UTC)
'sides, he even ain't "who knew what duty was", he's still a zealot. Chat him up in Act 3 with pro-mage Hawke - "Our rule over Mages is divine right granted by the Maker!" "Elthina shouldn't egg mages on lest they'll start to think they're people" and so on. Take your "divine right" and shove it up yours, douchebag lord. If there's still place up there what with the pole and your own head. Dorquemada (talk) 08:08, February 6, 2012 (UTC)
I was wondering why I couldn't kill him and the rest of the templars with fire by my pro-mage Hawke after the final battle. After all, we're at war with the templars, for crying out loud. I thought war kinda implies killing enemies. But hey, if the devs include the option of killing him, than the fangirls would go "BAWWWWW!!!". After all, who needs consistency if the character has nice hair (apparently, can't understand what's so special about it), and had a crush on your mage Warden (I'll copy myself from another thread: when I was 12 my attempts to express my feelings to a girl were less pathetic)? Who needs logic and reason in the plot? So staying on topic, the DA writing team did a poor job with that excessive fanservice.-Algol- (talk) 08:44, February 6, 2012 (UTC)
I agree re Cullen with both Algol & Dorquemada. Asherinka (talk) 09:19, February 6, 2012 (UTC)

I don't even remember Cullen saying those things exactly and I played both mage/templar...But the whole Cullen thing being only fanservice is a notion I dislike. I don't know the facts around it and don't claim to, but I would say it could have been a thing like Anders/Justice- where at first they weren't intending this, but then they get this idea and really start making it work. It wasn't like they just forced him into the storyline imo.

I like the idea of a second-in-command who blindly follows Meredith but then even he starts to see that she is losing it. Now we also have another focal point to follow for the mage-templar war, as I assume he will be strongly supporting one side or another. I would have preferred Meredith not go bonkers and follow her, since I loved her character, but I'll take what I can get. I say they made him work well in the story, although I am angry they waved a magic wand and suddenly he was cured from being a nut. Xelestial (talk) 23:34, February 7, 2012 (UTC)

For instance, see here. The comments of this LPer pretty much sum up my reaction to him) I do not believe that he is a 'zealot' but I do believe that he is unreasonable, and I don't like him. Though he is definitely way better than Meredith. Asherinka (talk) 09:53, February 8, 2012 (UTC)
It felt to me like they took a series of short stories(good ones mind you!) and tried unsucessfully to weave them together into a cohesive whole.Each of the characters have good writing behind them.Anders struggle for mage emancipation is a good one as is Fenris's endeavours to be free of Danaurius,but putting them together is like locking Malcom X and Nathan Bedford Forrest in the same room and expecting it to end well.The stories just don't hang together well.Oso27us (talk) 15:25, February 8, 2012 (UTC)
Verbatim quote: "We have dominance over mages by divine right. But it is cruel how she leads them on, letting them think they might have a chance at rebellion".
For extra fun, you can rat Anders out to Cullen in the very same conversation, and his answer is, "I will pass on your warning". That's from a templar who is pious and, shall we say, quite dedicated. The only reaction from Anders (who at this point has, shall we say, trust issues) if he's in the party when Hawke's trying to pull a Judas is "What are you doing?!" Yep. :-) Dorquemada (talk) 17:28, February 8, 2012 (UTC)
Advertisement