From 1d4chan

So, now we have a lovely edit war brewing between a cocksmoking fanboy and a flaming anti-fanboy faggot. Fantastic. Guys, a little more humour, a little less asspain, okay? --Furore23 19:38, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for defusing the situation with your diplomatic skillz. For the record, was just undoing a bunch of edits by some unfunny idiot who was strikeout-arguing with pages. Because that's hi-fucking-larity right there. Tim 08:15, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
It's true I am a tactful and gentle soul. And if you're not part of the problem, good sir, then you're part of the solution. --Furore23 00:07, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh, sweet merciful Jesus, it's happening again, it's just like in the dream! Please don't edit a paragraph that flows just fine, if all you're going to do is insert a paranthetical clot of pure >OPINIONS. If you're not adding to the factual or entertainment value of the article, I can't see how you're helping. Anyone wanting to get into a mass debate on the merits of Mass Effect 3 already has the entirety of the internet to do it in. Remember that the overall tone of 1d4chan is somewhat derisory, making mock of the things we love. That is a fun thing to do, and we all have to hold onto our balls when the particular thing we love the most gets its time on the waterboard. --Furore23 (talk) 23:23, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I see you have deleted my paragraph "Alternate Opinion" on Mass Effect 3, Newerfag. It's cool if it didn't make it for some reason, I can live with it, but can you explain to me why it didn't make the cut? I tried as well as I could to make it reasonable and not-fanboyish, but it seems something went wrong. Care to elaborate, please? - With friendly, if somewhat confused regards - TheWiseDane

  • It was indeed reasonable, but the problem was that unintentionally undermined its own argument. Ultimately, it claimed that the ME series was becoming less of an RPG and more of a cover-based third-person shooter- which is exactly the opposite of what the majority of its players actually wanted from it. The writing consisted mostly of a few good spots (e.g. Tuchanka) surrounded by crap and plotholes, most of which are never even acknowledged. Character development actually regressed in several cases (Ashley comes to mind), and to be blunt nobody here really cares about the guns or the enemy AI- what's most important to 1d4chan's audience is the fact that the game made a lot of promises that it never intended to deliver on and did only the bare minimum to resolve the actual plot (and even that was done only grudgingly). The fact that the "alternative opinion" essentially agreed with the primary opinion that the game was just a Gears of War clone with more dialog led me to take it out.--Newerfag (talk) 04:33, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Yeah, I see what you mean. I don't agree completely, but I see why it wasn't needed for a site like 1D4chan - Thanks for elaborating :) - TheWiseDane


Considering he's still doing nothing but blanking this article after his ban's expiration, I suggest we just temporarily protect this page so that only registered users can edit and then perma-ban his IP. It'd probably stop the inevitable revert war that's going to clog up the recent changes page. Tactical Mehren (talk) 23:21, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

I'd say ban the guy permanently. Given that he has no real interest in talking things out and would prefer to make threatening remarks to other users, I don't see a reason to let him stay. However, given that he'd probably just jump to another ip address, we should probably semi-protect it anyway. -- SFH (talk) 00:25, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

So, Inquisition...[edit]

...It's out. It's getting good reviews. I've played it and kinda like it. There's just one problem: I didn't hate Dragon Age II as much as other people seem to either, and trying to edit that last bit at the end screws up the pacing and story-arc the page is going for of "the decline and fall of the Bioware Empir... *ahem* RPG." Thus, while I'm sure that some poor sot needs to add info to this page, I'm equally sure I'm not the sot to do it. --SpectralTime (talk) 20:20, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

  • Aaaaaand, I hate to be unpleasable here, but geez, Newerfag. I thought the old one struck an even-handed balance between what they got wrong and right. Do you have to go through and surgically excise even the slightest glimmer of positivity? I'm genuinely asking here: if you want it more than I do, I'll certainly get out of the way. --SpectralTime (talk) 20:01, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
  • If you want an edit done you should do it yourself, otherwise you're never going to learn what should and shouldn't be posted. If you like DA2 (and I did as well) then go ahead and list the positives, feel free to revert the changes that people do if you can point out why they're unreasonable. There's plenty I'd like to do to the article that wouldn't go over to well (like pointing out why the Bioware cliché chart doesn't work and was pulled completely out of somebodies ass) but I don't think that would go over to well with most of the users on the site so I'm not going to remove it from the main page. I might make another discussion post later on to explain why it doesn't work though. --Triacom (talk) 8:33, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Why the Bioware RPG Cliché chart does not work.[edit]

So I decided to go ahead and break down why that chart on the front is flawed by the different cliché's it brings up, now I don't have Neverwinter Nights listed here because I admittedly never played through the story, otherwise what I don't list in the sections I can agree with the chart on though I'm not going to be removing the chart from the page:

  • You Hail from Humble Origins...:
    • Baldur's Gate: Not only is CandleKeep one of the most prestigious schools in the entire world you are taught by one of the worlds greatest scholars and wizards.
    • Knights of the Old Republic: You have no recollection of your past and think you are a soldier when in reality you are a former Sith Lord that every Jedi is aware of.
    • Mass Effect: Covered in the picture.
    • Dragon Age: Covered in the picture.
  • A devastating battle sends your quiet life spinning out of balance:
    • Baldur's Gate:Things had already been brewing for quite some time and the trip itself is what throws your life out of balance, not the attack that happens on it (though that's definitely a factor).
    • Knights of the Old Republic: You have no recollection of your past and think you are a soldier. Even if you had a life before this it would not have been a quiet one.
    • Mass Effect: Covered in the picture.
    • Dragon Age: Covered in the picture.
  • The attack leaves you alone with two companions, of martial and magical prowess:
    • Baldur's Gate: The attack leaves you alone. Imoen finds you after the attack and you don't get either of those companions until well after that.
    • Knights of the Old Republic: The attack leaves you with Carth. To claim it leaves you with Carth and Bastila is complete bullshit and ignores the whole point of the first several fucking hours of the game.
    • Mass Effect: The attack leaves you with Kaidan, returning from the planet does not happen for a long while and to say it leaves you with both Kaidan and Ashley is to bullshit two separate battles together.
    • Dragon Age: This is bullshitting the entire intro together, so according to the picture the attack that takes away your family is also the attack that kills the king and most of the Grey Wardens (it does say one devastating battle after all). You only get Morrigan once the intro is over which is a long while past and devastating battle which might send your life spinning out of balance and as such cannot possibly be included in such a thing.
  • Undaunted by the attack, you recover are swiftly invited into an elite order that places you into a position of power or authority over the rest of humanity:
    • Baldur's Gate: Covered in the picture.
    • Knights of the Old Republic: You have no power or authority over the rest of humanity by becoming a Jedi (again) and this is a re-induction instead of being invited into the order. You also don't get a choice in the matter and it's anything but swift, as there's an entire fucking planet that happens in between the attack and you becoming a Jedi.
    • Jade Empire: Again, you don't have a choice, are not invited, and don't have power over humanity.
    • Mass Effect: This wasn't necessarily swift and doesn't offer you authority over the rest of humanity, it offers you authority to do what people tell you to do as you are just a special agent. You are also not invited to join, the only reason you become a Spectre was because of political pressure on the council and they didn't really want you there to begin with.
    • Dragon Age: Grey Wardens don't have authority over humanity, if they did Dragon Age: Origins would have been a very short game. You are also never given a choice in this either.
  • You discover you must travel to four main locations in order to save the world/galaxy:
    • Baldur's Gate: Oh yes because the world was going to be destroyed if you didn't stop an imposter from getting the throne! Spoilers: It wouldn't. Also you discover you had to get to Baldur's Gate, shocking I know. The other locations are just the leadup.
    • Knights of the Old Republic: The Galaxy would have been just fine if you didn't do anything. It's because you went and travelled to these places that it gets fucked up later on (and going to them doesn't solve anything, you have to do shit on another planet to save the Galaxy).
    • Jade Empire: Covered in the picture, why this isn't coloured to show it doesn't apply I do not know.
    • Mass Effect: Going to those places doesn't do anything by itself, they're setup for later.
    • Dragon Age: Covered in the picture, you go all over the place and once you reach the place you were travelling to you have to travel some more. Also you're trying to save one country, not the world.
  • With your mission underway, your every effort is thwarted by an evil or sinister organization:
    • Baldur's Gate: Oh yes I remember Sarevok being constantly on my heels thwarting my every move... except that doesn't happen at all... it's almost like the exact opposite happens in that game and that's the whole point of the story...
    • Knights of the Old Republic: You're being chased by one Sith Lord (and one man is not an organization regardless of the size of his army), the others do not care.
    • Mass Effect: Cerberus don't do shit in Mass Effect 1 (let alone shit to stop you), and neither the Geth nor the Reapers actively try to bring you down either outside of any missions where YOU specifically went to fight THEM.
    • Dragon Age: The picture doesn't even try here, again one man wants you gone (and he's not evil), the Darkspawn are not any sort of organization and even if they were they don't try to stop you outside of times when you went to go kill them.
  • At some point, you fall asleep and there is a dream sequence:
    • Dragon Age: The others were covered fairly well, Bioware is big on their dream sequences but the Fade is not the realm of dreams, it's the realm of Spirits and Demons.
  • Further along in your journeys you discover the ruins of a sprawling ancient civilization:
    • Baldur's Gate: A city is not a civilization, and even if it could be a civilization it isn't ancient.
    • Knights of the Old Republic: The Sith and Jedi are trying to get to artefacts, not ruins. Furthermore the artefacts were left by the same civilizations that are currently in the galaxy.
    • Jade Empire: 20 years is long ago? How could 20 years ever be considered ancient and how could one small town ever be considered a civilization?
    • Dragon Age: The Deep Roads are filled with the ruins of the Dwarves... who are STILL AROUND.

Now I'll admit that Bioware games have a lot of cliche's (mostly in their dialogue and overall story) but I just wanted to point out why trying to justify their games on one chart doesn't work, and it's because the games actually are different from one another and not just because one is fantasy and the other is sci-fi. --Triacom (talk) 7:41, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

This is some super nitpicky bollards. I quit reading after the first million hours, but I can sum up: while you might be mainly right about this detail and that detail, you're missing the real point - that the games for the most part follow a house style, a kind of template that becomse easy to identify. The Bioware formula is quite well-recognised, and they don't need defending from it.

I know that they have lots of clichés, I said that in the previous paragraph, yes the plots get resolved in mostly the same way (which is their biggest problem in my opinion) but this is just me pointing out that they don't just make the same game every single time. --Triacom (talk) 23:21, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Sorry for the editing screw-up, you're quite right about that. But not the rest of that stuff :p --Furore23 (talk) 17:12, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

If you'd like to point out where I'm wrong, please do, otherwise this is going to be very one sided and I'd like to know what I'm wrong on. --Triacom (talk) 17:59, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Your entire approach is the wrong one to take. The chart is about broad thematic and structural similarities, not about nitpicky details. Of *course* you can 'prove' that it's not the exact same game over and over! But the Bioware structure is pretty clear across their entire ouevre. --Furore23 (talk) 12:10, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

If the chart is meant to be broad then why does it try to be so specific? For example if it said "AN attack leaves you devastated but you recruit a ragtag team to stop the villain and save the day" then it would be broad and apply to a lot more things rather than "THE attack" and going into detail what the attack leaves you with and also meaning that it's the same attack that "throws your life out of balance" (which in itself is false because that one just plain doesn't happen in a lot of the games). If they wanted to make a more accurate chart then it would help to cut out or alter the bullet points that don't apply to more than half of the games (there's more they can add to make up for those), as it is I could make a bullet chart pointing out that Warhammer Fantasy and Warhammer 40K are the same game because they're both based around war, they both have moving and shooting phases, both have swords and guns, etc. To throw them a bone though, I'm surprised they missed some obvious ones like the misunderstood villain (it turns out they're not evil for the sake of evil) the attempted redemption of a villain, and others like that. --Triacom (talk) 18:38, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Oh dear God. --Furore23 (talk) 14:06, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Bioware's making a Warhammer RPG?[edit]

Can a sauce be provided for this? Yes, there is a glut of Warhammer (fantasy and 40k) videogames currently, but I cannot believe for a second that this is a thing until I see hard evidence.

Sounds like it's just a rumor. Ignore it. --Newerfag (talk) 06:58, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Honest question[edit]

Can't help but wonder which one of the contributors or whoever declared that ass defect is an excellent and top-notch and blah-blah great product? I actually have played this more than once and just fail to remember it as anything other than a conglomerate of clichés with fair amount of lazy and refined dumb. In particular i was alarmed by "top-notch characters", "story" and the most important "plenty of interesting side missions to do" and all this i have just failed to find in there repeatedly. Enlightenment plz?

  • I think I was one if the people writing that, and I'm not interely sure I can explain it. Not that I don't still mean what I wrote, but that it's subjective. Sometimes you just don't get what others like, and that's it. I love the series, and it's one of my favourite series to date, but that might have just as much to do with the fact that I have played it many times and am pretty invested in the lore. Nothing that could convince you if you don't like it, though. TheWiseDane (talk) 22:40, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
    • Thnx for sharing, but i don't think i've asked anything about game lore now, have i? I've asked about top-notch characters which i just fail to notice. Like Kaiden Alenko who is basically 2nd Carth Onasi or Liara is another Bastila; Wrex like Canderous and Garrus is just another generic cop-guy with strong sence of justice and moral compass and such.
By story i didn't mean lore but an actual story/main quest which is in all honesty is pretty fucking dumb. Just remember the very first quest(Eden Prime) and try to think alittle about it, events and dialogue that occured during it and what happened next in the citadel.
Not the least issue is side missions. Now i don't know where anyone managed to find plenty of interesting stuff to do during it. All i have found is an boring repetative crap as find yet another cursed planet with copy-pasted palette-swapped enviroments infested with piles of turd which are somehow pose as valued resourses; generic copy-pasted buildings with and by anything that is holy copy-pasted enemies with never-ending demented howls like "Go go go! GOgogo!! Gaugaugau!!!" and "I will distroy u! Iwill devstroi u!!" Arrgh..
The rest is just like shepherd gets a call/overhears stuff that only it can solve and it does in exactly same manner as before. You'll be lucky to hear scraps of dialogues during it...
Bear in mind that's only quarter of the iceberg.
Once again: enlightenment plz.
  • Which is why I'm not going to try to convince you that it's objectively good, because you obviously don't like it very much. Maybe I like it because it was one of my first encounters with sci-fi, one of the first next-gen games I actually got to play and the first game I played with intricate character relationships. it's just precious to me, the whole series, and I'm not going to try to convince you of that if you don't like it in the first place.
That said, much of what you mention is about the first game, which admittetly is quite dated. Remember, that game is from freaking 2006 - For the time it was very impressive, good looking and interesting. No other game had been done like it, with a setting of that scope. Personally, I think the next game in the series gets some colours back in the series' cheeks, basically being the best game of the three to me.
Other than that, no, I'm not gonna enlighten you, because you obviously don't want that. You lay out line upon line for me to hook unto, so we can have some grand discussion and so that you perhaps can convince me that the game sucks or whatever, but that's not gonna happen. If you truly want to be enlightened, I can't do shit about it. TheWiseDane (talk) 10:25, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Why even bother then with writing all this demented mess on the main page? Conglomerate of stamps and cliches have been cruising from game to game for quite a while now resulting in a sickening acceptance to such an extent, that when they tried to break this depraved and vile circle(to an extent) with DA2 they received scolding and HATE and RAGE ARRGHH!1 from fans and who not. Someone managed to repeat themselves a couple of times writing about DA:I, lol. How is it possible that one title receiving praise and awards and another hate and scolding when stripped of setting they are(storywise, characters for example) almost identical? There is more to it.. and about that argument that ass defect 1 is a 2006 game, well so what? kotor made an appearance in 2003 and it is still the best sw game you'll find(yeah, kotor 2 is way deeper but deadline ruined it) They don't have any copy-pasted enviroments there, lol, story was retarded and dull, true but diluted with side quests and such that made game not only bearable, but actually pretty enjoyable. So, bottom line is - bioware makes crap. Have always been. And will always be. It is a simple yet undeniable truth. Comparing it, gently speaking is a fool's errand. Not that anyone wants to anyway, it would seem.
    • Two things. First, sign posts with four tildes, like a man. Second, I'm denying it. I've played those games and enjoyed them. Some random whine-specter on the internet isn't going to suddenly lift the scales from my eyes and make me decide they were all crap all along, especially not when he can't even be bothered to put the slightest effort into his own grammar and spelling. And it's not like saying something sucks as if it were self-evident is a particularly cunning or useful argument. --SpectralTime (talk) 11:14, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

No one bother to actually answer the question? Not even try? This cheap assault by accusing me of being illiterate? Lol. Just lol. To answer that question - yes, it IS evident. Read that chart on the main page it's pretty accurate. Yes, i've played a couple of their games.(Neverwinter Nights, KOTOR 1, Jade Empire, Ass Defect 1, 2, 3, Dragon Age Origins, 2, Inquisition) All storylines are basically the same: some luckless chump(player character) have to, just Have to save the world(village\country\planet\galaxy\etc) from pending Exterminatus. Only luckless chump can do it, period. Add some dipshits for dialogues\love story\whatever. Drag them throughout game world to solve all their problems so a dipshit can commit its life to luckless chump. Organization to join(mandatory!) jids\spirit monks\specters\grey wardens\inquisition.. The list goes on, cliches are piling up. Cunning\useful arguments, don't make me laugh. Also - ALL works based on good vs bad is crap by definition. When it had been done lasily\clumsily it's double crap. So this hero walks to a villian, hurting\wounding\killing\wasting everything in its path and all like rant-rant-rant "good better than evil" or "democrapsy better than tyranny" ARRGH!11 and strikes it down or whatever.. it's just tasteless, boring, stupid, obnoxious, obsolete. Best "creators" can do is to fill their product with some good stuff like characters or side-quests or locations or mini-games or gameplay feature, such things that will turn tasteless, cliched, dull pile of crap into something bearable. Speaking of bioware, they did it in KOTOR 1 for example. Released in 2003 this is still the best star wars game. A lot of stuff to do, to actually have fun... Now, i would really like to my question - What makes ass defect 1 SO special\praised\accepted\liked\whatever when it's just a husk? Empty, hollow husk devoid of care, interest, fun. Where are this interesting\original\top-notch\non-cliched characters? Where are interesting\original\non-linear\non-cliched side-quests? Where are non-copypasted\non-palette-swapped\original\beautiful locations? Setting? Blah! Copy-pasted. From star wars, from a lot of places. Giant space station with council to govern? Babylon-5. Mass Relays? Stargate. Evil machines? Terminator. Et cetera, etcetera, even dialogues sucks with this atrocious dialogue wheel with good\bad lines and mindblowingly retarded persuasions. For the life of me i would never understand why this dumbass cliched pink-teared b-movie soap opera reject is so loved that everyone(i sincerely hope not) just sings like a skipping record same demented bullshit ass defect 1 praise i've seen here on the main page.

  • Yeah, you're right. Star Wars, Lord of the Rings and all the other classics aren't working off of all these tropes at all.
You know, you can dislike Bioware all you want, but why don't you go find some other forum where other people share your opinion? We just don't, that's the fact of it. You'll have a lot more fun discussing how shitty it is with other people who feel the same. TheWiseDane (talk) 20:26, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Are we ever going to have a Tortanic section?[edit]

It's such a large part of why people hate Bioware and EA that I can't understand why this page barely mentions it. 23:08, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

If I was to guess, either people didn't feel like adding it or they didn't play it. If you want to add more to it go right ahead. -- Triacom (talk) 23:15, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Bioware loves daddy issues? Let me count the ways[edit]

I was thinking about Bioware games, and reflecting on a few stories led me to realize that this companys puts lots of daddy issues into their story. While daddy issues can and do make for good story material, Bioware uses them so frequently, I wonder whether any of the writers are work through personal issues in their writing. Here are some of the more prominent examples in Bioware franchises:

  • Baldur's Gate: The main character being a child of Bhaal is the source of much of the plot and its conflicts.
  • Star Wars - The Old Republic: Companions like Andronikus Revel had abusive fathers (Revel claimed his father shot him in the foot at age six over crying) - or abusive adoptive fathers in the case of Kira Carsen, and other characters are estranged from the fathers/father figures like the Togruta jedi Ashara Zavros.
  • Dragon Age: Every PC backstory involves daddy issues except the City Elf backstory. There's the drama around Alistair's ancestry and the loss of his father figure (Duncan). Other squadmates in a similar boat include Zevran whose father abandoned him and Oghren becoming a questionable father himself. The main religion in Thedas (Andrastianism) is about people being the wayward children of The Maker and trying to win his approval. In the second game it's not so widespread, though in the third we get a few more added such as Dorian and Krem. Dragon Age 4 is a possibility because family was one of the big three plot elements spoken about by the devs, but won't count until confirmed on release.
  • Mass Effect: This franchise is loaded with them. A father is absent from every backstory for Commander Shepard (their father may be alive in the first game, but only the mother is spoken with or even identified in the Spacer backstory) and nearly every squadmate across the franchise - especially in the Shepard trilogy - has daddy issues (such as Wrex who had to kill his own father in self-defense, Tali whose father neglected her then died in the second game, Thane being a bad father trying to make amends and Garrus who had a falling out with his father over how to uphold the law). Also in the third game the closest person Shepard had to a father figure - David Anderson - dies, and numerous characters have strained relationships with their fathers from squadmate James Vega abusive father to minor NPC Dr Ann Bryson being angry with her father over a minor argument before he gets murdered. This continues a bit in Andromeda with the Ryder twins - one of who is the PC - having strained relationships with their father followed by his death early in the game.

Would anyone say this is overdone? -- Flufflion (talk) 19:00, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Possibly, but on the other hand that's more of a symptom of them being overdone in fiction as a whole- it was an old cliche even before Freud codified it into the Oedipus complex. --Newerfag (talk) 16:35, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
Right, let's go over this:
  • Baldur's Gate: That's not daddy issues. If you're writing it like that you could've easily made it mommy issues because of how it takes more than one person to make a kid. There's also more drama with the protagonists sister than their father, and the protagonist did have a good father figure when they were growing up.
  • The Old Republic series also includes Knights of the Old Republic, in which there's actual mommy issues. This is one of the reasons I suggested changing the title.
  • Dragon Age: again, you're taking family issues and ignoring everything except the father. Bringing up the maker in that setting as a male is also stupid since they're colloquially identified as male while not having a defined gender. I like how you skip right over the second game, which goes entirely against your theme so you just pretend it didn't exist.
  • Mass Effect: for the characters you bring up, few of those are daddy issues. Shepard's father not being mentioned is not evidence of daddy issues, you're just assuming that it is when the point is that the backstory's what you want it to be. You're also assuming that aliens have the same morals and standards that humans do, when we don't have a good indication of what an abnormal relationship with their sons/daughters really is. I also recall a lot of drama involving mothers in that game, especially with an Asari character(s) you're not mentioning.
This is why I said it would be better to change the bit to family, since Bioware loves to talk abuout family and make them a part of their games. You can certainly see daddy issues in there, but only if you're ignoring all other aspects of a family when you do so. Is it overdone? Possibly, but I doubt you'd find it easy to write a story with little to no familial backstory at all. Mass Effect did that for Shepard and you took it as an opportunity to assume there were daddy issues in there anyway. -- Triacom (talk) 16:49, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
You’re partially right and partially wrong about this, Triacom. I'm not ignoring family issues, I'm saying daddy issues are an overused cliché in Bioware's games. While family issues crop up often, the most common ones are daddy issues; compare how many family issues are daddy issues or involve the father, and how many don’t. Some games have it less than others, and I think it adds up over time and across franchises.
  • Baldur’s Gate: While I concede not many characters have daddy issues, there are a few who do. The main example is the PC’s biological father, who conceived them and their siblings specifically so they could later be killed for his benefit which drives much of the plot. Then there’s characters such as Anomen and Rieltar. While not many at this point, it definitely adds up when factoring in later franchises and games.
  • Dragon Age: I didn’t pretend the second game didn't exist; if I did I wouldn't have mentioned it or that these issues are less widespread there - which I did mention (unlike you not even mentioning what I said about the third game and the upcoming fourth). Back on topic, I'll concede the point about the Maker. Regarding Alistair, he doesn't seem to have any mummy issues and while he had sibling issues with Goldanna he got over those rather quickly. Finally, let’s add Queen Anora's daddy issues with Loghain and Nathaniel Howe's issues with Rendon Howe to the list. There's more (including NPCs like Dhaventh) but I'm trying to be relatively concise.
  • Mass Effect: The Normandy could be called the SSV Daddy Issues. Tali's father had an unhealthy relationship with her; in the second game on Tali's loyalty mission we speak to Shala'Raan - Tali's honorary aunt – who tries to make excuses for Rael yet also reassure Tali of his love at the same time, something unnecessary if he was a good father by quarian standards. Quarians are also said to value family and no-one, even among the quarians, calls Rael a good father. I'm not sure whether Krogan consider killing a parent part of a healthy relationship, but the story shows that a lot of Krogan culture after the Genophage, and some before (Krogan Rebellions) is self-destructive. There’s little indicator how Drell culture views parenthood, but Thane considers himself a bad father in the past and no one expresses otherwise (Cpt. Bailey even wistfully says “You think he’s the only man who ever screwed up raising a son?” – and that implies Bailey could also be added to the list). Then let's add other characters with daddy issues including Miranda - a test tube baby made by father who's a rich megalomaniac playing a eugenics game with Miranda and her sister, Jacob - estranged from his father only to find him stranded on a planet playing despot with other survivors, Grunt - has identity issues stemming from his father figure Warlord Okeer, Zaeed – since Andromeda reveals he abandoned his son Bain, and Anderson – the second game reveals he has an actual son he doesn’t get along with.--This unsigned comment was made by (talk) {{{2}}}
I already looked at how often they come up, for every example of daddy issues you can find several of family issues. Daddy issues are nowhere near as prevalent as family issues, and I don't think you know what daddy issues means, since you seem to be lumping together everyone who had a father, and even those whose father's weren't mentioned. Let's go through the list though:
Baldur's Gate. Right from the start you have a game where daddy issues are dwarfed by family issues. Viconia's reason for being on the surface for example, the PC's story with Imoen, the PC's story with their half-siblings, etc. What it doesn't have is daddy issues, because the PC did have a father figure, there are no issues present from a missing or unusual father figure during the character's development since Gorion dies after the PC is an adult. Anomen also has issues relating not just to his father, and his disagreement with his father isn't daddy issues. Not only does that happen after he's an adult, but you can't lump in everyone who has an argument with a family member as having "X issues". That's not what it means.
Dragon Age: to start with you did try to ignore it. You quickly skipped past it because it's proof that family issues are far more prevalent than daddy issues, and addressing them would destroy your point. I didn't mention anything about the fourth game because it's not out yet and it would be really stupid of anyone to assume they knew what happened in a story that isn't yet released. If we're also skipping past issues that got resolved quickly then your points about DA:O's characters also wouldn't count. They also don't even come close to the amount of family issues in DA2, which on its own outweighs any daddy issues in the series without needing family examples from those games to back it up.
Mass Effect: Tali's father did not have an unhealthy relationship with her. You're making one hell of an assumption over one project he did, and ignoring what the characters who knew him for a lifetime are saying. The reason they're reassuring her is because she's grieving, that's something you should do regardless of the circumstances. Your example of him not being a good father is also dumb, I don't recall other characters saying "she had a good X" at all, does that mean her entire family is bad? For the Krogans, you admit to knowing nothing about it, so why are you making assumptions about it? Thane considering himself a poor father isn't what daddy issues is at all, it has nothing to do with this because it comes from the children, not what the parents think. Miranda is about the only correct example here, because Jacob had no psychological issues to speak of that resulted from his father. He was worried when it seemed like he could see him again, he was mad when his father turned out to be a piece of shit, that's not unnatural. Grunt never met his maker and his issues stem from being born from a tube. I honestly wouldn't even call them issues since he has no problem working past them. That's not daddy issues, otherwise we could just write it off as mommy issues since he didn't have one. For Zaeed, again, daddy issues aren't something you get from the father talking about their kid, that's not what the phrase means.
You had 21 days to reply and you couldn't even look up what the phrase means or compare examples of family issues vs daddy issues in that time. -- Triacom (talk) 04:55, 1 August 2019 (UTC)