Dragon Age 2

[Tale]

Is it geek to read fantasy books ?

Somewhat. But it is far more geek to have in-depth internet arguments about which elements of a fantasy book were borrowed by a particular fantasy vidyagame.

There is no quantity of geek. There only is geek and not geek.

 

Embrace it.

[aries101]

David Gaider talked with Fantasy Magazine about DA2.

 

 

http://www.rpgwatch.com/#17393

 

Apparently, the framed story was Laidlaw's idea:

 

 

David Gaider:

Much has been made of the framed story in Dragon Age II. What was the inspiration for this addition, and how does it affect the experience of the game?

 

David Gaider: The framed narrative was Mike

Edited June 1, 2011 by aries101

[Tale]

There's basically two instances where unreliable narrator were envoked and both were backed away from immediately.

 

Nobody would be happy having choices and character overwritten by such a thing, anyway. "What you choose to do doesn't matter, the narrator's just lying!" "You son of a... LYNCH HIM"

Edited June 1, 2011 by Tale

[Enoch]

I can certainly see the similarities between the concept with Cassandra interviewing (interrogating) Varric and the movie 'the usual suspects'. The movie just pulled this off much much better than the game, apparantly...

While the execution issue is certainly pertinent, it goes deeper than that-- the problem with making the audience doubt the narrator's truthfulness in a game is that the gaming audience has miles more personal investment in the story than does the audience for a book or movie. Players don't want be told (or have it implied) that all or part of what they have just accomplished was a flagrant lie or exaggeration. It's weakens whatever feeling of accomplishment they're getting from making progress in the game's challenges.

[Ice9]

Argh! You're all ruining HBO's Game of Thrones for me!

[entrerix]

most fantasy books are gaaaaaarbage (for this post: fantasy means only sword-n-sorcery)

 

i won't say "all" because im sure there are some good ones. but honestly I've read dozens, maybe hundreds, of fantasy books, and could probably not genuinely say "this is a great novel" about any of them.

 

there are lots of them that were fun to read, or enjoyable in some sense (the dragon and the george series was my favorite when i was 8, and the drizzt series was my favorite when i was 13)

 

but i don't think i've read even ONE truly great one

 

 

ok scratch that, The Hobbit is genuinely a great book.

 

LOTRO is ok, and the black company trilogy is ok too i guess. i might go so far as to say the second dragon and george book, The Dragon Knight, is ok too, but I haven't read it since i was 10 so who knows... stardust was maybe good too, but is more like a fairy tale than a novel

 

alright, maybe i started too strong here... but still there are sooooooo many crap fantasy books it makes buying anything "fantasy" feel like a sin because you might be encouraging another larper to finally finish that book they've been hacking away at since college about the really grimdark fantasy kingdom of Multiplevowelswith'inthename.

 

no i havent read a song of ice and fire, probably because by the time i heard of it i was already firmly cynical about fantasy writing in general.

 

 

and yes, i too have a half finished fantasy novel, and yes, before anyone asks, it sucks.

[Gfted1]

^Have you ever read the Riftwar Saga by Raymond Feist?

[entrerix]

i was actually just talking about that author yesterday with some friends. the single most unattractive woman i have ever seen asked me for one of the krondor books back in 1998-1999 or so when i worked at a bookshop. turned me off completely to the idea of ever reading anything that might have been read by that *thing*.

 

please don't tell me the author is actually good? it will make my memories cry.

[Gfted1]

 

I would like to quantify this by saying, at the time, I thought the books were outstanding and read that series (Riftwar) a few times over. This was years ago though so I may be wearing my rose colored glasses and I never read another of his books since then. I was more using that series to try to get a gauge of what you like / dont like.

[Drowsy Emperor]

most fantasy books are gaaaaaarbage (for this post: fantasy means only sword-n-sorcery)

 

i won't say "all" because im sure there are some good ones. but honestly I've read dozens, maybe hundreds, of fantasy books, and could probably not genuinely say "this is a great novel" about any of them.

 

there are lots of them that were fun to read, or enjoyable in some sense (the dragon and the george series was my favorite when i was 8, and the drizzt series was my favorite when i was 13)

 

but i don't think i've read even ONE truly great one

 

 

ok scratch that, The Hobbit is genuinely a great book.

 

LOTRO is ok, and the black company trilogy is ok too i guess. i might go so far as to say the second dragon and george book, The Dragon Knight, is ok too, but I haven't read it since i was 10 so who knows... stardust was maybe good too, but is more like a fairy tale than a novel

 

alright, maybe i started too strong here... but still there are sooooooo many crap fantasy books it makes buying anything "fantasy" feel like a sin because you might be encouraging another larper to finally finish that book they've been hacking away at since college about the really grimdark fantasy kingdom of Multiplevowelswith'inthename.

 

no i havent read a song of ice and fire, probably because by the time i heard of it i was already firmly cynical about fantasy writing in general.

 

 

and yes, i too have a half finished fantasy novel, and yes, before anyone asks, it sucks.

 

I agree with you, sci fi and epic fantasy are trash genres.

 

There's only one epic-scifi crossover book I ever read that showed incredible writing skill and evocative ideas and that was Gene Wolfe's Shadow of the Torturer.

 

His Book of the New Sun is great, but the first in the series is extremely good.

 

RPGMasterBoo.

[Tale]

Would a recitation of Sturgeon's Revelation be of any point at this juncture?

 

Using the same standards that categorize 90% of science fiction as trash, crud, or crap, it can be argued that 90% of film, literature, consumer goods, etc. are crap. In other words, the claim (or fact) that 90% of science fiction is crap is ultimately uninformative, because science fiction conforms to the same trends of quality as all other artforms.

 

For the brits about

Benjamin Disraeli wrote in 1870: "Books are fatal: they are the curse of the human race. Nine-tenths of existing books are nonsense, and the clever books are the refutation of that nonsense.

Edited June 1, 2011 by Tale

[entrerix]

lol, thats kind of you to attempt to gauge my taste at all! let me help:

 

i already listed a few fantasy books i kinda liked, so here are a few popular ones i did not:

 

i can say without a doubt that i hated the first wheel of time book, didnt bother reading past the first.

 

and HATED the first shannara book (this was actually the first book in my entire life that i threw away in disgust, at the tender age of 16)

 

i tried some book by C.S. Friedman on recommendation, it was unspeakably bad

 

i actually made it all the way through the chronicles trilogy by weis and hickman, it was the definition of mediocrity, which i guess makes it pretty good for fantasy writing

 

 

i havent read anything by the more modern popular authors: abercrombie, rr martin, erikson, or rothfuss. i keep assuming that i'd be in for another wheel of time embarrassment.

 

 

 

edit: i actually think there are much more great science fiction books than fantasy: Dune, Enders Game, The Forever War, Rendezvous with Rama, are great, and i could probably name another ten or so without too much trouble.

 

 

edit 2: and i like both of those quotes that tale posted though in the case of the first i firmly believe that fantasy writing breaks the 90% rule and actually is 99% crap.

Edited June 1, 2011 by entrerix

[Drowsy Emperor]

Incorrect, IMO. Sci Fi is, or was, for most of its existence about ideas taking precedence over literary skill and writing style. One only has to read the horrible prose that was characteristic of the entire genre until the 60ties and 70ties, and even then it didn't get much better.

 

A point that can often be brought up is the much vaunted Asimov. Granted the man had good ideas, but he couldn't write for ****!

 

@entrerix: I can only tell you that Martin is a soap opera with swords and more sex than usual.

 

I also liked Zelazny's writing style, and I'm lead to believe that Ursula Le Guin is good as well, although I can't find the books I want to read in these parts, and my interest in the anarchistic ideas she advocates in her better books has diminished.

Edited June 1, 2011 by Drowsy Emperor

[Tale]

Incorrect, IMO. Sci Fi is, or was, for most of its existence about ideas taking precedence over literary skill and writing style. One only has to read the horrible prose that was characteristic of the entire genre until the 60ties and 70ties, and even then it didn't get much better.

That occurs when any art form has something approaching a popularity surge. It's no coincidence that that happened at the time of the space race.

Edited June 1, 2011 by Tale

[John Lemon]

Legion/Wardens: Fight the clear infestation of the darkspawn. Made from conscripts and volunteers, some with a criminal record.

Night's watch: Defend the kingdom against the Whitewalkers. Made from conscripts and volunteers, some with explicit criminal records.

Warden gets conscripts, Legion doesn't. Others were a nebulous threat, darkspawn were always a clear and present danger to the dwarves. Warden/Night's watch comparison however, is accurate.

Dragon Age: dragons thought extinct until the beginning of the Age (ergo the name), 3 dragons total, so far. Oh, yeah you can shapeshift into one.

Song of Ice and Fire: nobody bothered to check their pants to see if they were boys or girls. Or maybe they realized that dragons went on a rampage every time they tried to.

Kinda forgot the drakes and dragonlings, eh? Over the course of one year the Warden fights 7 drakes, one high dragon, one spirit dragon, one standard dragon, two dragon thralls and numerous (I stopped counting after a while) dragonlings.

Granted, still obvious inspiration it's obvious.

Yeah, both rip off different periods of real life.

Now we are arguing semantics

 

I did say that DA was a bad copy, who the hell has just two groups vying for the throne? 5 much better.

It's like the difference between the wars of scottish independence and the three kingdoms. Although I'm not too keen to argue this since it all falls under "monarchy shenanigans" and I could never stand those for long.

 

Don't understand the rose phrase.

ehhh, what the hell are the Ghouls then? fellows who just decided they liked the Deep Roads better?

 

Darkpsawn: Capable of high levels of intelligence (I know the Architect wasn't all that smart but it still counts, don't you think?) Corrupted humans?Asexual reproductions? HUMANITARIANS?( I don't know what you are on but I want some) I doubt that the process of becoming a Broodmother is asexual.

Ghouls are what happen when you touch darkspawn... fluids. The are humans who basically join the hivemind full of crazy and die months later.

Wights on the other hand are undead. Others are closer to demons in that regard.

The Architect was an aberration, he says so himself. I wouldn't say one of possibly millions is statistically significant.

Andrastian lore believes darkspawn to be corrupted magisters (the Dwarves however, say: "I dunnolol"). However, the spawning of genlocks by dwarven broodmothers, hurlocks by human broodmothers and sharlocks by elven broodmothers points to a relationship between the two.

If a vegetarian eats vegetables, what does a humanitarian eat? Really old joke.

Broodmother spawns more darkspawn like ant queens. That would fall under asexual unless my memory of biology textbooks 5 years ago has died badly. The process of becoming a broodmother on the other hand...

...Faith of the Seven = the Seven

...Old Gods = Old gods

The Seven? As in the Seven Old Gods? Because I can't find anything else related to seven and religion on the DA wiki.

Faith of the Seven are based off a family and their archetypical roles, the old gods of ASoIaF are nature spirits.

The old gods of DA are based off... I don't know, actually.

mercenary companies: the Brave Companions, the Second Sons, the Stormcrows, and the Golden Company.

Yep, now find their equivalents in Dragon Age, like I asked.

no magic in Fire and Ice, probably why Gaider had to go and equate to the middle ages church. Albeit one of the most interesting points in the game, and the most underdeveloped.

There's some magic. More low key, but still there. IIRC Samwell went through a magic ritual and failed horribly and the castellan of Storm's End died to some magic by Stannis's witch on call.

I don't even know why you argue this, Gaider himself it's a professed fan of the series and used it as an inspiration for dragon age.

He's a fan, not a plagiarizer. I doubt he'd lift things wholesale from ASoIaF.

I'm arguing the similarities I'm not seeing, I see rather more parallels with human history than anything else.

Also ASoIaF>DA

And I'm inclined to agree with you.

[entrerix]

i can put up with mediocre writing if the idea is good enough. I can put up with mediocre ideas if the writing is good enough (mr cormac mccarthy i am looking your way)

 

i have a few zelazny books, but havent read them in yeeeaaars and can't remember them very well, maybe i'll re-read one and see if they stick with me better, now that i'm a bit more aged.

[John Lemon]

Try David Eddings? Very derivative, but the Belgariad and the Mallorean are quite good.

[Drowsy Emperor]

Incorrect, IMO. Sci Fi is, or was, for most of its existence about ideas taking precedence over literary skill and writing style. One only has to read the horrible prose that was characteristic of the entire genre until the 60ties and 70ties, and even then it didn't get much better.

That occurs when any art form has something approaching a popularity surge. It's no coincidence that that happened at the time of the space race.

 

True, but I can still confidently say that the number of sci fi books I've read and the number of those that I wouldn't use to wipe my bum is extremely disproportional.

 

I don't think sci-fi has yet offered a novel that would be a timeless classic of world literature. Those considered classics, like Shelly and Verne are really not in the same league as Dostoyevsky, Cervantes, Shakespeare etc.

 

Though, in general, Sturgeon is quite right.

Edited June 1, 2011 by Drowsy Emperor

[HoonDing]

I can generally forgive a lot in fantasy works if the setting is interesting. Case in point, Riftwar & Wheel of time.

 

David Eddings novels are the book equivalent of BioWare games. They always feature the same character archetypesa and there's always the same type of epic quest going on. Not to mention the endless banter between either incredibly annoying or incredibly witty characters.

 

I'd recommend Guy Gavriel Kay, Stephen Donaldson and Robin Hobb. Among today's best-sellers, Steven Erikson is best.

[Drowsy Emperor]

I can generally forgive a lot in fantasy works if the setting is interesting. Case in point, Riftwar & Wheel of time.

 

David Eddings novels are the book equivalent of BioWare games. They always feature the same character archetypesa and there's always the same type of epic quest going on. Not to mention the endless banter between either incredibly annoying or incredibly witty characters.

 

I'd recommend Guy Gavriel Kay, Stephen Donaldson and Robin Hobb. Among today's best-sellers, Steven Erikson is best.

 

Have you read the book of the new sun?

[sorophx]

Dostoyevsky

I have a feeling Достоевский in original to you would be pretty much like Shakespeare is to me, almost incomprehensible. he's somewhat hard to read because of his style. he was a pretty disturbed person. and I don't believe readers can fully appreciate a writer reading translations, even very good ones. it goes beyond the meaning of the words, it's in the music of the language

[Drowsy Emperor]

Dostoyevsky

I have a feeling Достоевский in original to you would be pretty much like Shakespeare is to me, almost incomprehensible. he's somewhat hard to read because of his style. he was a pretty disturbed person. and I don't believe readers can fully appreciate a writer reading translations, even very good ones. it goes beyond the meaning of the words, it's in the music of the language

 

I think he did the Serbian translation himself... or maybe not. Maybe that was Gogol.

 

Its the same with Nietzsche, you need a very talented translator who is also a writer/poet to convey most of what was originally intended.

 

But you take what you can get. Shakespeare in english is hard even for a native english speaker...

 

I also wish I could read Stirner (whom nobody remembers although he's in many ways superior to Nietzsche) in the original german, but that's not gonna happen in this lifetime.

 

You are essentially right though, writing prodigies/geniuses tend to use language in a way that most people cant comprehend, let alone translate. Његош's (one of our best writers) poem and play The Mountain Wreath, is a horror to translate and understand if you arent from these parts.

Edited June 1, 2011 by Drowsy Emperor

[Hurlshort]

If we are talking Russian writers, everyone should read Master and Margarita by Bulgakov.

[greylord]

I admit, I like a lot of the Sci-fi or space opera and Fantasy books. I enjoyed shannara a lot, I enjoyed dragonlance a lot, I enjoyed Thomas Covenant a lot, I even enjoy someo fthe T$R books and I do enjoy the Drizzt books (at least up until 1000 Orcs...then it started to go downhill fast). I enjoy Asimov, I enjoy heinlein, I enjoy some of the older Sci-Fi authors.

 

I don't enjoy most of the stuff these days. It seems they try to put in so much sex...and more sex...and more sex that it seems unappealing to me. I never was into the romance books, and trying to integrate that idea into the fantasy books these days really doesn't float my boat. I haven't read A game of thrones, or Tad Williams (actually tried some Williams, but his stuff was rather disgusting in some ways in regards to sexuality).

 

I suppose you could claim that Donaldson's books are absolutely the worst offenders in these realms, but unlike most of the quacks, Donaldson is actually one of the best writers I've ever read. I have tried some of the new writings...and most of them aren't written enough to overlook their fetish fascination with sexual deviations and sex thrown in simply to have sex in the books. I suppose I've read Herbert as well...

 

So, with a Song of Fire and Ice, really isn't my boat of tea. I do like that older fantasy style which some don't like...but with the trash that comes out these days...I find I normally will read other genres before I touch the stuff that is the fromance (fantasy romance, or is that fantasy rape and manipulative sex?) that seems to be so popular these days.

[Drowsy Emperor]

If we are talking Russian writers, everyone should read Master and Margarita by Bulgakov.

 

Indeed.