Seconded. Also the fact that they were more blood mages, raiders, Templar Grunts, thieves and bandits in Kirkwall than actual citizens made hardly any sense.Rawne1980 said:Dragon Age 2.
All the way through it you get drummed with "Mages are good .... Templars are bad".
Yet all the way through it the Templars are helpful and polite and the Mages are trying to eat my face.....
Kind of hard to follow a plot and take it seriously when it doesn't know what the fuck it's doing itself. In fact, the Templars don't turn "bad" until the very end and even then it's only 1 person .... who turns bad because of a corrupt sword .... made from metal Hawke found.
WHO WRITES THIS SHIT.
Skyrim has the same problem. There are only about 200 NPCs in the towns, and you'll kill more bandits than that in a few hours dungeon-crawling.endtherapture said:Seconded. Also the fact that they were more blood mages, raiders, Templar Grunts, thieves and bandits in Kirkwall than actual citizens made hardly any sense.snippety snip
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PlotHole (under the "Video Games" section)wakeup said:there are a lot of huge plot holes in games some of which im sure a lot of people haven't picked up on yet. Id love to hear what people think are the biggest plot holes in games and by gosh there's a lot of them.
That is inaccurate. The game attempts to say "Some mages are good, some are bad and the same goes with templars". Not every mage in the game tries to kill you or someone else or just genreally be a jerk. For example Feynriel is an unfortunate apostate who will only do something bad if you indulged in some really horrible Video Game Cruelty Potential. For the templars there are a quite a few templars who are unabigiously evil. Take Ser Alrik, the templar who wanted to make all mages tranquil, which is considered by many of them a fate worse than death.Rawne1980 said:Dragon Age 2.
All the way through it you get drummed with "Mages are good .... Templars are bad".
Yet all the way through it the Templars are helpful and polite and the Mages are trying to eat my face.....
Kind of hard to follow a plot and take it seriously when it doesn't know what the fuck it's doing itself. In fact, the Templars don't turn "bad" until the very end and even then it's only 1 person .... who turns bad because of a corrupt sword .... made from metal Hawke found.
WHO WRITES THIS SHIT.
I agree to a certain extent, but I still believe that in light of DA:O, the templars vs mages plot felt very contrived. Think about it. In the tower mage origin story of DA:O, a mage uses blood magic and everyone freaks out! It was a big deal that didn't happen often! Even the fiance of the mage that uses blood magic abandons her trust of him and willingly submits to punishment for even associating with him. When you come back to the tower after it has fallen in DA:O, you run into mages that say they want nothing to do with blood magic or the rebellion that is taking place. DA:O did a good job of making you feel sympathetic to both the templars and mages while successfully making the delineation that negative actions were performed by a few bad apples on both sides.Protocol95 said:That is inaccurate. The game attempts to say "Some mages are good, some are bad and the same goes with templars". Not every mage in the game tries to kill you or someone else or just genreally be a jerk. For example Feynriel is an unfortunate apostate who will only do something bad if you indulged in some really horrible Video Game Cruelty Potential. For the templars there are a quite a few templars who are unabigiously evil. Take Ser Alrik, the templar who wanted to make all mages tranquil, which is considered by many of them a fate worse than death.Rawne1980 said:Dragon Age 2.
All the way through it you get drummed with "Mages are good .... Templars are bad".
Yet all the way through it the Templars are helpful and polite and the Mages are trying to eat my face.....
Kind of hard to follow a plot and take it seriously when it doesn't know what the fuck it's doing itself. In fact, the Templars don't turn "bad" until the very end and even then it's only 1 person .... who turns bad because of a corrupt sword .... made from metal Hawke found.
WHO WRITES THIS SHIT.
In order to prevent to derailing this thread I will make this post as short as I can and not limit how many times I respond. For the increaing tension I feel that this is more of an argument of perspetives and opinions and as such do not want to discuss it any further. I also wish to point out that not every mage becomes a blood mage and that not every templar want to kill every mage, of note during the templar endgame three mages believing Orsino has gone to far surrender to the templars, and as such the templar Cullen wants to merely arrest them. I apologise if my post here has not been very concrete and I would have liked to have a civilised discussion but this is an innappropriate place to do so.alphamalet said:Protocol95 said:SnipRawne1980 said:Snip
Snip
I'd definitely like to keep it civil, so no worries there. I'll make a couple clarifications about what I said, like you did, and then drop it.Protocol95 said:In order to prevent to derailing this thread I will make this post as short as I can and not limit how many times I respond. For the increaing tension I feel that this is more of an argument of perspetives and opinions and as such do not want to discuss it any further. I also wish to point out that not every mage becomes a blood mage and that not every templar want to kill every mage, of note during the templar endgame three mages believing Orsino has gone to far surrender to the templars, and as such the templar Cullen wants to merely arrest them. I apologise if my post here has not been very concrete and I would have liked to have a civilised discussion but this is an innappropriate place to do so.alphamalet said:Protocol95 said:SnipRawne1980 said:Snip
Snip
In order counter this slight derailment I will post a plot hole which I believe to be of particualr notice. In Black ops 2should you snipe Alex Mason in a non-lethal area he will turn up in the ending with Woods even asking where he has been but the game does not answer this. I felt this could have been solved with a simple handwave, such as saying he was in hiding from Menedez and came out of hiding once he was defeated or something else a person more talented at writing than me could come up with.
I disagree. I felt the game did a good job of showing that Mages are people who want basic freedoms that everyone else is allowed to have and showed them as people, while at the same time is showed that the Templars are needed because the Mages simply can't be normal people. Knight-Captain Cullen said it best: "There was a time when a Templar at the door was a welcomed sight among the people. Now though, people are just as likely to slam that door in our face than help us. The image of the chained apprentice is one the mages are all too willing to use." Still, I think it could have been done a LOT better in the game and I agree that, at times, it felt like the game was telling you one thing but showing you another. I think a lot of the things that happened in that game could have been avoided if people just sat down and listened to each other.Rawne1980 said:Dragon Age 2.
All the way through it you get drummed with "Mages are good .... Templars are bad".
Yet all the way through it the Templars are helpful and polite and the Mages are trying to eat my face.....
Kind of hard to follow a plot and take it seriously when it doesn't know what the fuck it's doing itself. In fact, the Templars don't turn "bad" until the very end and even then it's only 1 person .... who turns bad because of a corrupt sword .... made from metal Hawke found.
WHO WRITES THIS SHIT.
With the Ezio thing its understandable though, Ezio's lived most of his life up until this point seeking revenge on the man who killed his family, and when he finally gets there, he realizes what a broken man Rodrigo is, and leaves him to his fate, suffering forever knowing that Ezio was the prophet, and not him. That his lifelong dream of controlling a power greater than god is moot.Sniper Team 4 said:I disagree. I felt the game did a good job of showing that Mages are people who want basic freedoms that everyone else is allowed to have and showed them as people, while at the same time is showed that the Templars are needed because the Mages simply can't be normal people. Knight-Captain Cullen said it best: "There was a time when a Templar at the door was a welcomed sight among the people. Now though, people are just as likely to slam that door in our face than help us. The image of the chained apprentice is one the mages are all too willing to use." Still, I think it could have been done a LOT better in the game and I agree that, at times, it felt like the game was telling you one thing but showing you another. I think a lot of the things that happened in that game could have been avoided if people just sat down and listened to each other.Rawne1980 said:Dragon Age 2.
All the way through it you get drummed with "Mages are good .... Templars are bad".
Yet all the way through it the Templars are helpful and polite and the Mages are trying to eat my face.....
Kind of hard to follow a plot and take it seriously when it doesn't know what the fuck it's doing itself. In fact, the Templars don't turn "bad" until the very end and even then it's only 1 person .... who turns bad because of a corrupt sword .... made from metal Hawke found.
WHO WRITES THIS SHIT.
Anyway, my biggest plot hole at the moment is the best ending in Black Ops II. The game even calls attention to it: "Where the hell have you been for the past thirty years?" A very good question...that the writers totally forgot to answer.
The original ending to Mass Effect 3 still bugs me, but I feel that has been talked about to death. Extended cut bugs me too, though slightly less. Only slightly.
Ezio's failure to act at the end of Assassin's Creed II. He just got through killing dozens of innocent guards minutes before, and NOW he decides he's done killing? Everyone who died in Brotherhood is dead because of that.
Speaking of which, in Assassin's Creed III, why doesn't Desmond pull out the Apple in the beginning? It's not like he didn't have it all the time.
Why is the Didact in Halo 4 doing what he's doing? The Flood has been destroyed. He has no reason to declare war on humanity.
Those are all that I can think of at the moment, though I know there are more that have bothered me over the years. I'm not even sure some of those are plot holes, or just bad writing.
Yes he does, because humanity were at war with the Forerunners for a millennia before the Forerunners had even heard of the flood. They were at war because the Forerunners hold the 'Mantle', but humanity are the ones who are naturally supposed to be in charge of it. He is unwilling to relinquish control over to the humans and plans to destroy them rather than let them have it.Sniper Team 4 said:Why is the Didact in Halo 4 doing what he's doing? The Flood has been destroyed. He has no reason to declare war on humanity.
Because Jack was a back-up plan, not his main one. He used him in case everything went wrong, which it just so happened to do. He couldn't keep him alive and in Rapture because Ryan could have easily discovered him, which would ruin the point of him being an ace up his sleeve.Marik Bentusi said:BioShock: Just why did Fontaine pull of his elaborate scheme with the protagonist instead of bunkering him somewhere close? It just adds a crapton of unnecessary complications not only in theory, but also practically as it turns out his creation really does backfire on him.
I'd usually just handwave it, but add to that Fontaine's already laughable Saturday Morning Mustache-Twirling Doctor Evilstein Villain Out For World Domination spiel and the fact the whole farce was really just written to allow for the character freedom plot twist, I can't help but be disgusted at the terrible writing beneath and think of the plot hole as an irredeemably deep one.