![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Finished Mass Effect
Actually, we finished a few days back, and started playing Mass Effect 2 on the same day. I'll hold my thoughts on ME2, though, so this post can be clean of spoilers for it.
So if you've been following along, you've probably noticed that I was spoiled for the choice that Shepard has to make on Virmire. We were able, at least, to spare Wrex; he and Shepard had a pretty good rapport, and her Charm skill was just about maxed out, so the outcome of that conversation was never in doubt. Then we sent Ashley with the salarians, fought our way inside with a team of Tali and Wrex (a nicely balanced party, especially for fighting geth), had our conversation with Sovereign -- interesting to have it essentially confirmed that the Reapers are running the show, no matter what Saren thought -- and made our way to the decision I've been dreading for a good 40 hours.
T was holding the controller at that point, and he was not spoiled for the outcome, so I let him make the call, and he decided that our Shepard would go back and save Kaidan. If it had been my call, I would probably have done the same thing, but I would have hated myself for it. But then I would have hated myself for saving Ashley and letting Kaidan die, as well. Awful as it was, though, I can only imagine that it would have been a thousand times worse if I hadn't known to brace myself for losing one of them from the day I started the game. For the most part, I wish I had gone in unspoiled, although it's somewhat comforting to know that we didn't screw up somewhere, that there is no secret trick to saving them both.
So before I go on, let me take a moment to appreciate Ashley Williams: great character, a staunch supporter, and a good friend to my Jane Shepard, even if they didn't always see eye to eye, particularly on the issue of alien cooperation. Their push and pull was really interesting to me, and I'm bummed that I won't get to see that relationship develop into future games. If I ever replay the series, learning how it plays out with Ashley on board will be a major motivator.
We were basically done with plotty sidequests at that point. There were planets we'd never scanned, probably side missions we'd never triggered, but we decided it was time for endgame. So we busted out of the Citadel, headed for Ilos, and hooked up with Kaidan on the way. Their relationship got sweeter and a bit more engaging during this time frame; I got the sense that their decision to make a move was, in part, tied up with their grief for Ash, but we also got a near-declaration of love out of Kaidan on the Citadel (he checked himself and corrected the word choice to "appreciate", but not before the first syllable was half out of his mouth, which was pretty adorable).
And then we went down to Ilos with Wrex and Liara, and we never saw him again.
I did like endgame -- the battles on Ilos were tough enough to be satisfying, all the revelations about the Protheans from Vigil were pretty fascinating (and I liked how excited Liara was to be learning about them, despite the dire situation), and driving the Mako through a mass relay was, I have to admit, pretty badass. Then we fought our way through the Citadel, where we saved the Council, got Saren to shoot himself, and encountered a bug where the final battle against husk!Saren kept crashing the PS3 -- when we died, in the midst of battle, as the in-battle cutscene triggered, and once, most annoyingly, after we beat him. We even went so far as to delete the game and reinstall it, and that didn't even fix the problem. But the second time we won, the game let us continue. Finally. We recommended that Anderson be named to the Council (our most-paragon-of-all-the-paragons Shepard may have respect for the rule of law, but she resents Udina for grounding them and otherwise being a general pain in her ass) and then flew off into the metaphorical sunset, ready to convince the galaxy that the Reapers continue to be a true threat.
So overall, I'd say I enjoyed the game, certainly enough to continue on to ME2. Gameplay was pretty fun once I got used to the controls, although it helped immensely that I could hand the controller off to T whenever I got frustrated. And I did get frustrated, particularly when the Mako was involved. (Believe it or not, Mako missions were his favorite thing.) If I ever replay, it will definitely be on Casual (we played on Normal with the targeting assists turned on). Good characters, story with a few twists on the usual expectations, the sense of a deep and interesting universe that I hope I get to explore more. I haven't fallen in love the way I did with Dragon Age, but I suppose time and future games will tell.
So if you've been following along, you've probably noticed that I was spoiled for the choice that Shepard has to make on Virmire. We were able, at least, to spare Wrex; he and Shepard had a pretty good rapport, and her Charm skill was just about maxed out, so the outcome of that conversation was never in doubt. Then we sent Ashley with the salarians, fought our way inside with a team of Tali and Wrex (a nicely balanced party, especially for fighting geth), had our conversation with Sovereign -- interesting to have it essentially confirmed that the Reapers are running the show, no matter what Saren thought -- and made our way to the decision I've been dreading for a good 40 hours.
T was holding the controller at that point, and he was not spoiled for the outcome, so I let him make the call, and he decided that our Shepard would go back and save Kaidan. If it had been my call, I would probably have done the same thing, but I would have hated myself for it. But then I would have hated myself for saving Ashley and letting Kaidan die, as well. Awful as it was, though, I can only imagine that it would have been a thousand times worse if I hadn't known to brace myself for losing one of them from the day I started the game. For the most part, I wish I had gone in unspoiled, although it's somewhat comforting to know that we didn't screw up somewhere, that there is no secret trick to saving them both.
So before I go on, let me take a moment to appreciate Ashley Williams: great character, a staunch supporter, and a good friend to my Jane Shepard, even if they didn't always see eye to eye, particularly on the issue of alien cooperation. Their push and pull was really interesting to me, and I'm bummed that I won't get to see that relationship develop into future games. If I ever replay the series, learning how it plays out with Ashley on board will be a major motivator.
We were basically done with plotty sidequests at that point. There were planets we'd never scanned, probably side missions we'd never triggered, but we decided it was time for endgame. So we busted out of the Citadel, headed for Ilos, and hooked up with Kaidan on the way. Their relationship got sweeter and a bit more engaging during this time frame; I got the sense that their decision to make a move was, in part, tied up with their grief for Ash, but we also got a near-declaration of love out of Kaidan on the Citadel (he checked himself and corrected the word choice to "appreciate", but not before the first syllable was half out of his mouth, which was pretty adorable).
And then we went down to Ilos with Wrex and Liara, and we never saw him again.
I did like endgame -- the battles on Ilos were tough enough to be satisfying, all the revelations about the Protheans from Vigil were pretty fascinating (and I liked how excited Liara was to be learning about them, despite the dire situation), and driving the Mako through a mass relay was, I have to admit, pretty badass. Then we fought our way through the Citadel, where we saved the Council, got Saren to shoot himself, and encountered a bug where the final battle against husk!Saren kept crashing the PS3 -- when we died, in the midst of battle, as the in-battle cutscene triggered, and once, most annoyingly, after we beat him. We even went so far as to delete the game and reinstall it, and that didn't even fix the problem. But the second time we won, the game let us continue. Finally. We recommended that Anderson be named to the Council (our most-paragon-of-all-the-paragons Shepard may have respect for the rule of law, but she resents Udina for grounding them and otherwise being a general pain in her ass) and then flew off into the metaphorical sunset, ready to convince the galaxy that the Reapers continue to be a true threat.
So overall, I'd say I enjoyed the game, certainly enough to continue on to ME2. Gameplay was pretty fun once I got used to the controls, although it helped immensely that I could hand the controller off to T whenever I got frustrated. And I did get frustrated, particularly when the Mako was involved. (Believe it or not, Mako missions were his favorite thing.) If I ever replay, it will definitely be on Casual (we played on Normal with the targeting assists turned on). Good characters, story with a few twists on the usual expectations, the sense of a deep and interesting universe that I hope I get to explore more. I haven't fallen in love the way I did with Dragon Age, but I suppose time and future games will tell.
no subject
Good to hear that game play was fun once you got used to it. I have mixed success with shooters, but find them easier on a computer than on a console. Sadly, my gaming laptop's HD is almost full so I might need to play ME on the PS3 once I take the plunge.
Without being spoilery, what would you say are the three best aspects of ME's story?
no subject
no subject
Key bits were "political aspects" and the character-plot integration. My one big disappointment with the DA games were the companions who were just sort of there rather than fully integrated into the plot (with Fenris as the flag carrier for that group).
Although, I might need to wait until spring or summer before I have time. Scheduling it in, though.
no subject
(Not that I'm trying to start an argument about Fenris. I've just been noticing that disconnect a lot lately.)
It helps, I think, that ME only has six companions, so there aren't as many balls for the writers to juggle. The cast gets much larger in the second game, and I'll be interested to see how well they keep it up. The politics I thought might attract you. ;)
no subject
Story-wise, I really wanted more about Tevinter through Fen's perspective and his script didn't deliver much more than "magisters are horrible, horrible people and mage freedom is a terrible idea." I guess I want to see more of what makes Tevinter work, despite its corruption, because it is clearly one of the oldest human societies we know about in Thedas. While I think Fen provides an outstanding foil for Anders, after three PTs, one (cringeworthy) rivalmance, and rewatching all of his scenes (plus romance and rivalmance scenes) a few times on YouTube while outlining a fic idea, I haven't really seen much more than "a good foil for Anders."
I'm never one to start arguments-- I'm more curious to know what it is that people really like about Fenris. Please share if you wish? Or have time? I'm actually using Fenris as one of my four POV characters for a massive fanfic and he's the one who is a headscratter for me (a welcomed challenge, but a headscratter). In the end, I'm going to deconstruct him, just as I will to my other three POVs (Aveline, Merrill, Cullen), so all of the characters will be much grittier than their canon representation on the game disk.
One thing that will always be a show stopper (and, be forewarned, don't read my fenris fanfic), is that I deeply dislike (read as: seriously creeped out by) the personality type Fenris was given and I'm an anti-fan of his voice actor.
no subject
So basically, I see Fenris as a successful foil for Anders, and the story really needs someone in this role: every other party member is either pro-mage freedom, or relatively neutral on the subject, so I think made for important balance to have a character who has good reason to fear mages and want to see them kept in check. Another way he provides a contrast to Anders is how he learns to move beyond his suffering to consider the bigger picture and begin to build a life for himself. (This happens for sure if you fully rival him; my only Hawke who's friended him is about halfway through Act 2, so I can't speak to that side yet.)
I also found my rivalmance with Fenris to be very satisfying -- that was my aggressive female mage Hawke, and the way they moved from wary allies who often disagreed into close friends who learned to accept their differences and find common ground worked well for me. For me, the key to Fenris is that he doesn't *want* to be sympathized with; he doesn't want someone to pat his hand and say everything will be fine. On some level, he wants someone to challenge him, and for me, that's what the successful rivalry is all about.
Fenris not knowing much about the workings of Tevinter never bothered me; although I agree it would have been nice to get that perspective from someone, it wouldn't have made sense to me to get it from Fenris, because he was a slave with no access to the workings of power, and probably not much sense of the big picture. He has a narrow view of things, especially at first, and that's one of the things I like because it makes him seem more real to me.
I hope this is helpful, or at least interesting! Not expecting to change your mind, of course; I would never try to argue someone into liking a character they dislike, especially if fundamental squicks are involved. I agree, Fenris does tend to be polarizing, although I think Anders is more so. (I also like Anders quite a bit, although I don't necessarily defend all his actions. But that's another debate entirely!)
no subject
Agreed that Fenris ended up being the wrong person to give a good perspective on Tevinter. Hopefully the next game will remedy that because Tevinter as the strawman argument against free mages is getting a bit tired. ;)
Well, we are in total agreement about Fenris as an excellent foil! The game needed it for sure and, in that, he definitely provided. I liked how the Fenris-as-foil storyline compared the Tevinter mage situation with the Andrastrian Chantry system. That was smart storytelling (and something worth expanding in fanfic, imo), especially since Anders didn't really have a strong plan for what happens once mages have their freedom. Anders was far more focused on making change happen than what the change should be and that's where the TevinterSystem-vs-AndrastianChantrySystem comparison works really well. (Plus there are some interesting echoes when Seb and Fen have late game dialogue during the banter.)
For my tastes, I would have preferred more info about the Tevinter magister system such that Fenris' role as a foil was elevated into something higher *or* I would have just preferred someone who kept most of Fen's lines but was directly aligned with the Andrastian Chantry (either as a templar or a brother/sister). Either would have made Fenris feel more *integrated* into the DA2-Kirkwall plot, rather than just an interesting foil, if that makes sense. And even Seb doesn't really fill this second role, despite the little Anders-vs-Seb choice we have to make when Meredith leaves Hawke to deal with Anders after the chantry explosion.
Also agree that Fenris doesn't want to be sympathized with. I really like some of DG's comments about Fenris (and also Alistair, Isabela and... forgot who else?) in a recent post. I reblogged in a few weeks back.
Given that DG says that he wrote the rivalry first (the male!Hawke script for the rivalry), it makes a lot of sense that the Fenris rivalry is a solid rivalry. TBH, despite the things that I personally do not get into with the Fen rival-romance, the rivalry alone feels more grounded than the Anders rivalry. There were some interesting issues regarding how Anders' writer wrote the rivalmance that leads to a very unsettling situation in how one gets Anders to see potential mistakes in his key beliefs. Fen's rivalry flows a bit better. (As does Merrill's, which is beautifully written, imo.)
(Unfortunately, the Fenris romance is one big squick for me.)
Haha. Anders. I think he was very well written, but I so want to combine aspects of the friend path with the rival path for many, many reasons (to be discussed in an upcoming meta). My take on Anders is that he is one of the most brilliant villain protagonists I've met in a video game.
P.S.
Re: P.S.
I am fairly amused btw that the only comments so far on my Mass Effect post are a discussion of Dragon Age characters. ;)
no subject
Re: P.S. (Whoops... sorry, this is the draft of a meta)
The companions who lacked plot integration in DAO+DAA didn't bother me that much because those games are classic, epic-scaled, quest-fantasies where merry bands of misfits are the tropishly normal expectation. One can argue that Sten's inclusion in DAO gives insight into the Quanari culture and introduces a much larger world to the north. Wynne provides insight into how and why Circle system works, and why a mage might hold pro-Circle opinions. And, all of the DAO+DAA companions provide different outlooks on events, regardless of their role or lack of role in the main plot (e.g., Wynne vs Sten are both moralists but they work with extremely different moral compasses).
DA2 takes a different form. DA2's set of central plot arcs (Bartrand's expedition, the Qunari situation, Meredith's iron grip) have a cumulative relationship that runs parallel with Hawke's journey from escaping Lothering to existing as Kirkwall's Champion. Given that this story structure doesn't map to the "merry band of misfits off on an epic quest," my tastes and expectations become more exacting. I expect the characters to not only be interesting in their own right, but to also contribute to some aspect of the plot.
For instance, Aveline provides insight into Kirkwall's governance. She allows us to experience rampant corruption, we watch her rise up, and, when the Viscouncy crumbles and Meredith's iron grip tightens, through Aveline's 3rd Act role and quest we feel the Templar dictatorship's attempts to end the civilian government. This integrates Aveline into the central plot as a contrast case.
Merrill's role appears tangential to the central plot arcs, but her story with Marethari and the Dalish clan detail a system for managing the resource of magic, in contrast to the Circle system. (I and one other person on tumblr brought up the economics of magic last spring, and I went into detail on how DG's writing team treats magic as an economic resource and they have, so far, created three detailed systems for managing it: the Dalish tribal-scale collective-responsibility system, the competing Qunari and Circle industrial-scale systems. They've also created less detailed systems for apostate and hedge witch DIY and off the grid approaches). So, just as Aveline's plot arc shines light on Kirkwall's politics and a political system Meredith is trying to crush, Merrill's plot arc shines light on a contrasting economic system for managing the resource of magic.
Both of provide necessary counterpoint to the main DA2 story arcs and, with well developed contrasts as counterpoints, the story is able to create a story-agrument that is more than just a sequence of plot steps. (E.g., the difference between literary exploration and plot-driven fiction).
Now, while Sebastian's integration isn't as strong as it could have been, especially as an optional DLC, he provides insight into the Chantry's role in Kirkwall along with the voice of a highly privileged member of society. Yes, we could easily play the game without him and many people do. Varric, Anders, and Bethany/Carver play obvious, integrated roles in DA2's plot. Isabela, on the other hand, is more of an accidental linch pin, but one can say she provides an interesting twist to the 2nd act arc. I'd also say that Isabela is our poster child for the butterfly effect of unintended consequences, which is a theme that DA2 (and DA in general) likes to drive home. But, if not for the flapping of the butterfly wings that cause a massive storm, I'd call Isabela's role in DA2 the most tangential and tenuous of all the companions characters.
So, a typical exercise in story development (particularly when the story is expensive to develop, such as games, movies, and series) is to imagine what happens to a story if you remove a character. If you remove Anders or Varric, DA2 has a different plot, thus removing them is very costly with little benefit. Remove Aveline or Merrill and main Meredith/Circle plot is far less nuanced because there is less developed contrast, thus removing them weakens the story argument. Remove Sebastian or Isabela and a small set of key insights disappear and two forced decision points need minor rewrites, thus, both are potentially removable if budget insists. Remove Fenris and ...??? Arguably, the only things the story looses is Ander's foil and an underutilized view into Tevinter's economic system for managing the resource of magic. As a project manager, I would argue for his writer to make a better case else risk getting cut from the script.
Which really gets to this: most of the arguments I've heard for why Fenris is an excellent character have to do *purely* with Fenris' personal journey inside of his own story. I think that it is great -- a real mark of success -- that an interesting character resonated with a segment of the audience. And that isn't just a plus on a checklist, it is necessary for the kind of games Bioware makes.
But not all characters will automatically resonate with all player/viewers, which is why plot integration is an equally important counterbalance, and even more so given the financial cost of game development and the need to provide a little something for everyone in order to maintain or broaden market base (which, sadly, DA2 failed to do).
When I put on my managerial hat (after getting off the phone with bean counters), I want each character in a game like this to doubly pull their weight: 1. add to some aspect of the larger plot; 2. carve out a unique space that will especially resonate with one market segment. (Btw, on the one commercial production I was on, we targeted every single character to a unique market segment, and every character was thoroughly market tested. (obviously the other productions, aimed at training-and-sim were a bit different)).
Fenris is arguably one of the weaker characters for point 1, adding to the plot. For point 2, DG has explicitly stated in multiple places that he did not think Fenris' story would resonate with a wide audience (which, imo, is expected for many non-heroic character, but it is good to acknowledge this), and that it was a very unfortunate accident of poor planning that Fenris and Anders occupy the same romantic space (which DG jokingly referred to as "oh, god, we made Twilight!"). Writing and production under a tight deadline always creates difficulties, but I would argue that Fenris' characterization would have benefited from better definition of his *unique space*, either by differentiating his romantic story line from the space occupied by Anders, by enhancing Fenris' role as a contrast case in the plot (note: a foil is an underdeveloped contrast case; foils do not build a story argument, they only shine light on someone else).
To be honest, I think Fenris is a very interesting as a stand-alone character and another option to make him shine would have been giving him an additional role in DA2 with a DLC of similar size to Legacy. This would allow his personal character arc to turn into a fully developed plot that can stand alone outside DA2's plot. But, that asks for a larger budget. ;D
The easier solution is to develop him beyond that of a foil and make him into a contrast, much in the way that Aveline's character arc is exposes developments in Kirkwall's politics and issues with crime, and Merrill's character arc provides a contrast to the city's blood mages and to the Circle's system for managing the economic resource of magic.
So, despite Fenris having a unique and enticing character bio -- escaped, elven slave of a Tevinter magister -- the game's shortened development and production cycle didn't seem to allow enough time for Fenris' role to expand fully into his own space, and grow from foil to contrast such that his words and actions help build a unique space in the larger story argument. For instance, there are little things in the script that I would typically flag during editing sessions (and, in fact, I have flagged on titles I've been involved in developing, and on novels I've helped edit). Fenris' Act 1 recruitment quest contains word-for-word dialogue overlap with optional Act 1 NPC dialogue spoken by Cullen. It is surprising to my ear when the exact same phrases spill from the mouths of characters who come from radically different backgrounds: one occupying a position of extreme privilege who is an educated, devout Andrastian of "humble" Fereldan origin, the other a fugitive of the lowest class, functionally illiterate, and shaped by Tevinter's most decadent and morally depraved aspects. If the writers' goal had been to show how two people with seemingly opposite biographies can enter the stage in DA2 bringing word-for-word exact conclusions about mages and magic, the writers dropped the ball by never developing this very interesting contrast (which, in my mind, could have been as interesting as the Aveline's contrast and the Merrill's contrast). To me, this is the most economical fix to Fenris' script: biggest bang for buck using exist storylines. How did the magical trauma suffered by templar's second in command and the wolverine-esque magical horrors experienced by Fenris create worldviews that play to similar politics? How do those world views differ and how do they change? Scattered hints and pieces are in the script and just need to be brought to the foreground. Doing so elevates Fenris out of the role of Ander's foil, making him a true counterpoint and contrast in the mage freedom story argument.
Now, on the other hand, if the dialogue recycling with Act 1 Fenris and Act 1 Cullen was a sloppy accident, it's really is very unfortunate mistake because the writers missed the chance to develop a unique voice for a deeply underprivileged character.
I've had a few lengthy discussions with other writers who are also DA fans about our disappointment in how all of the DA scripts (DAO, DAA, DA2) perform a mixed job when writing the lines of the West's capital "O" Other: POCs, indigenous peoples, unwanted foreign cultures, and the poor. For instance, Marethari speaks cringe-worthy lines that reek of the noble savage stereotype, and then there is the entire handling of Velanna's script in which her storyline define as little more than The Angry Other. (Merrill is their saving grace because her story does a nice job exposing the intricacies of identity and lost culture.)
Regarding the issue of how one writes deeply underprivileged characters, the big headscratcher for me with Fenris is this: why are so many of his dialogue lines colored with strong subtexts of privilege and entitlement?
Unlike all of the other companions and many of the NPCs, Fenris often raises more questions than his characterization solves. Did his prowess in competition and status as Danarius' most favored slave and number one test case grant Fenris far more privilege than normal had by elves who are slaves? This explanation is extremely plausible to me, but the script would benefit from playing this out with further exploration.
Likewise, some of the text in Fenris' script strongly suggest a prior sexual relationship between Danarius and Fenris (which was later confirmed by DG). This also provides another motivator for Fenris' sense of privilege/entitlement, yet, despite DG writing the male!rival!Hawke romance for Fenris *first*, everytime I study Fenris' script dumps and cutscenes, I keep feeling like DG shied away from a key characterization point out of ... fear? judgement? criticism? push-back? inner censoring?
In the end, we're left with many interesting backstory facts (e.g., Fenris killing the fog warriors despite the sense of wonder he felt when with them) and glimpses of interesting deeper problems (e.g., DG confirmed that lyrium is an unstable substance, and we know that Fenris can be an unstable person), but, from a psychological standpoint all of these interesting facts feel under-intergrated and, as a result they seem at odds in creating the total package of Fenris' script. I'm all for complex complex characters who wrestle with deep seated contradictions (e.g., Alistair, Morrigan (!), Anders). I just feel that Fenris needed more script polishing, a complete elevation to the level of a contrast case, and that his VA needed better direction. The idea for Fenris is very compelling but baking him a little longer would have been much more beneficial.
I don't mean to pick only on the lines written for Fenris on this matter of nailing class and background. Aveline's writer (and VA direction) also commits this offense to a lesser extent. Her dialogue rings with a sense of class-based nobility that doesn't correctly evoke her background, where as Varric, Isabela, Anders, and Sebastian sound far more spot on for their socio-economic status, privilege-sets, and expectations.
The tl;dr version: I appreciate why a segment of the player base (and fandom) resonate with Fenris and find his personal story arc and romance/rivalmance deeply satisfying. I call that part a big success (even if it doesn't appeal directly to me, it has appeal, and having appeal is what counts). I think Fenris would have had broader appeal if he had been given a larger role as a contrast case that builds the larger story-argument of Kirkwall's Templar-Mage plot. This would have raised him up from merely being Anders' foil in that plot, and provided an opportunity to develop a unique voice for a character who can represent a deeply underprivileged background and the difficult decisions that are driven by lack of privilege.
(BTW, my litmus test for why Fenris is only a foil and not a full contrast case is this: fandom, including Fenris fandom, strongly supports mage freedom and prefers a slightly softer, kinder version of Anders' chantry bombing. If Fenris had been a contrast case in the the story argument, fandom's discussions about mage freedom would be far more closely centered in the middle and probably far more nuanced.)
.
If you suffered through this, typos included, I owe you a box of high end chocolate. And tea. Any thoughts are welcome and all deserve extra chocolate.
.
Complete and utter side bar: The fact that Fenris and Anders occupy the exact same of "man pain" romantic space and Fenris is a foil to Anders to the point that their banter almost becomes funny by Act 3 due to its predictability is why we see so much Fenders despite how acanonical or OOC Fenders might seem. That ship actually provides a much needed story space for expanding Fenris beyond of the role of Ander's foil while integrating him into Kirkwall's plot. Fandom "correcting" things that writers failed to do...
Re: P.S. (Whoops... sorry, this is the draft of a meta)
I don't think you make a strong case for Fenris being dispensable here. The two things that you say would be missing, as if to dismiss their importance, are to my mind the things that most argue for his inclusion. First, he acts as a foil to Anders, which is vital to the balance of the story. Second, he is the game's connection to the Tevinter system of mage resource management (I read that meta last year and remember it well), both presenting his (very biased) viewpoint on its workings, and providing a living example of what the system can create at its very worst -- which I would argue is exactly the same role Merrill plays with respect to the Dalish system. So he provides balance to the story in two key ways, which would be missing if he were not there. I agree that those aspects could have been implemented more fully, but you can say that about almost every character in the game except maybe Varric and Anders, and like so many of the problems with DA2, I think it comes down to the rushed development, not a fundamental weakness in the character.
I think fandom tends to support mage freedom overall because people in Western society, especially the USA, have been taught to prioritize personal freedom -- the importance of individual rights over the collective good, the value of "innocent until proven guilty", etc. So I doubt having a stronger argument for the other side would have made much difference in that respect.
no subject
You really should give it a try -- except for fighting in the Mako, I didn't find anything unbearably difficult, especially with the targeting assist on.
Re: P.S. (Whoops... sorry, this is the draft of a meta)
Re: DA2 - I'm not make a case for Fenris being dispensable because specific aspects of his script need to be played by someone and, without Fenris, the script has a hole. The key difference between Fenris and Merrill is that we see, in game, a functioning Dalish clan. We interact with them and are able to form sympathy toward their situation. As for the Tevinter folk, we meet them through Fenris, we know very little about them, have less reason to form sympathies, and, compared to the Dalish, they come off flatter: mustache twirling evil bad guy and his pawns. The Tevinter story line is important for reasons we both highlight, but it needed more room to breathe. Sadly, Bioware's (EA's) budget didn't allow it.
Sorry, my litmus test was not stated clearly because it confounds two things. It's not a matter of Anders aligning with American values (because, in many ways, I suspect he does not, and his Canadian writer wanted to create a character people disliked, albeit with partial success...). Story arguments illuminate dilemmas through a presentation of different incomplete, imperfect systems that, together, illuminate a larger whole. It is never a "This vs. That," but a "This and That points to something larger." In tabletop scenarios, these become very interesting. In videogames, they often reduced to simplistic "Third Options." While DA2's mechanics lacks a clear or a "clean" 3rd option, the overall presentation of a collection of story argument for the mage situation was, arguably, poorly represented. Also,we know from Bioware's comments that many pieces of script, potentially furthering story arguments, were cut for time and budget. So, that is the first point that got confounded. The second point is that Fenris was beautifully positioned to provide an additional story argument for the mage situation except... he ended up more as a foil. I think it is a shame because that little extra work would have drawn Fenris into the main plot line.
no subject
Re: P.S. (Whoops... sorry, this is the draft of a meta)
I didn't say that Anders aligns with American values, I said that *mage freedom*, as an abstract concept, aligns with the value of personal liberty, which is particularly valued in American society. So any argument against it is going to be a hard sell to that audience. Not impossible, but not easy either, especially if several key components of that argument end up cut for time. I read somewhere that DG expressed surprise that so many people side with the mages in the end, but it doesn't surprise me at all.
Re: P.S. (Whoops... sorry, this is the draft of a meta)
DG's surprise- I suspect his ideas for the story argument are not what gets implemented. He talks a lot about story getting changed and cut. Also, I don't know how market testing at bioware influences design but I have personally watched market research heavily influence the script of another video game. All about the bottom line... I have a meta in progress about DA's messy mage story argument and it's failure at conveying DG's snark comment: "mages are like harmless kittens-- kittens who explode and take out a city block." meta is really preview thoughts regarding DA3. The books, Asunder specfically, do a much better job at showing a broader story argument and more nuance, which may be why some ardent pro-Mage bloggers dislike the characters in the book. Or not. But they feature exploding kittens who are clearly dangerous...
Re: P.S. (Whoops... sorry, this is the draft of a meta)
Re: P.S. (Whoops... sorry, this is the draft of a meta)
And all the required Mako driving segments are perfectly straightforward and mapped for you.
So. Yes. I'd say that Easy Mode is default. But then, imo, the Mako is very, very fun and, with the Uncharted Worlds, one of the best things in the game. :P
Re: P.S. (Whoops... sorry, this is the draft of a meta)
Driving around in the Mako was okay once I got the hang of it (and learned how to avoid Thresher Maws), but I found doing combat from the Mako to be pretty tricky. Fortunately the Mako was T's favorite part of the game, so he was always happy to take over if I got into trouble.
Re: P.S. (Whoops... sorry, this is the draft of a meta)
Re: P.S. (Whoops... sorry, this is the draft of a meta)
And I find if you jiggle a bit and go back and forth up cliffs, you can usually find better traction. ;)
Combat can be tricky at first if you're not finding coordination with the rolling and gunning, but there are alternative strategies to it. For example, you can run over and damage anything but Thresher Maws, and doing so will often kill smaller targets and unbalance larger targets so you can roll back and shoot them without their shooting at you. You can also hop out and use the Mako as cover... although if it takes too much damage, getting in again will Critical Mission Failure. XD