Plot driven vs. character driven

I don't think any Bioware game is truly plot driven, at least since Mass Effect. ME and DA might have significant plots, but the driving force behind both franchises are the characters. There is a readon the ME3 ending failed... it took the focus off the characters and wholly centered on a coldly intellectual plot point. If you look at DA, it’s when the ending of the plot leads to character epilogues that Origins and Inwuisition were celebrated.

Bioware is character driven first and foremost.

Why isn't Hawke the principal character in DA2, again? What does "principal" mean in this context?

*cracks knucles*

From what I have been reading in this thread I think one of the things that make these conversations so hard to utilize is there is A. no real set definition for character and plot driven stories and B. from a writing standpoint the difference between the two and trying to say a story can be one or the other is ultimatley...unhelpful. Stories, good stories, by their neccessity almost are usually both plot driven and character driven stories. The plot effects the character, like a Blight neccessitated the Warden becoming a member of the Grey. Characters effect the plot, like Hawk's involvement in the Qunari invasion made them a key and influential member of the City of Kirkwall. And Characters effect other characters, like when Anders blew up the Chantry it set off a chain of events which forced Hawk to act and choose a side in the 'right of anulment' conversation.

The other thing that I think is important to keep in mind, taking this into consideration is that its not either or, but its a spectrum. And while I prefer my stories to have heavy character arcs and be very character driven even the best stories in that vein often do have heavy plot growth to. So from a spectrum of most plot driven to most character driven:
The Warden
The Inquisitor
Hawk.

What this means practically, what I hope BioWare does anyways, for the future since this is in the DA 4 sub forum is what happened with the Inquisitor and Inquisiton. While the Inquisitor did have their own character arcs in DAI it was (IMO) nowhere near as powerful as Hawk's story in DA2. As I read once this was kind of the intention. Mike Laidlaw wanted the story of Inquisition to be about the 'characer arc' of the Inquisition. Growing the organization into a mini super power and creating a Theodisian 'Rebel Alliance'. And that, the game suceeded in spades. The Inquisition became highly influential and greatly effected the setting/ plot of Dragon Age. What I hope is that BioWare gives us the deeply personal 'character driven' story of Hawk along with the more epic world changing narrative of Inquisition. Put these two concepts together successfully and DA4 has the potential to be amazing.

Further complicating this though is the Dragon Age games aren't a story about any one protagonist or group of characters but its a series about the evolution of the continent of Thedas. That kind of storytelling means that, no matter where the individual games fall on the spectrum, theseries itself probably is more plot driven...by neccessity.

I am finding it increasingly hard to understand why you are so adamant that Hawke does not fit this criteria. There is only one character that is present throughout the narrative of the story and that is Hawke. Aveline is also present from the prologue but does not really drive the action and can be left on the side-lines throughout the remainder of the story if the player wishes.

You keep saying that Anders is the hero of the story. This is odd considering you can actually tell him to take a hike mid-way through Act 2 and you only see him again at the end of Act 3. So if anything you could say he is an antagonist that Hawke has to deal with. Anders is needed for the maps but you can pretty much ignore him after that. You do not have to take him to the Deep Roads, you do not have to include him in your party. If he is not in your party then the "reader" will know very little about him or what happens to him before he pops up and blows the Chantry.

To my mind the main story of DA2 takes place in Act 1 and Act 2. It is the story of Hawke's rise to power from penniless refugee to Champion of Kirkwall. Act 3 is an epilogue and set up for the next game (or originally a DLC). The only character who challenges Hawke's position as hero is Varric, who of course is the narrator of the story. So if you had claimed that Varric was the real hero, that might have some validity.

Other main characters may contribute to what develops in Kirkwall but they are not the hero of the story.

Principal means "most important". The story of DA2 deals principally with the conflict between mages and templars. Even though there are things going on in DA2 that will later become important in DA3, when concentrating only on the sequence of events depicted, (a story being the sequence of events told in that ... well, story) the mage vs templar thing is what it's principally about. And it was Anders' inner turmoil and resolution of that inner turmoil that drove those events to its ultimate (and unresolved in DA2) conclusion. Hawke's story, while interesting I suppose, wasn't really the important happenings of DA2.

People are free to think otherwise

Yes.

Games can have more then one plot line to follow. Yes, Hawk was caught up in the larger events of Kirkwall (and got a more important role because of that) but the game was about their 'rise to power'. Heck I think a trailer pretty much said that...

As an aside I just noticed that BioWare does tend to try and put 'what their game's are about' in the trailer somehow. DA 2 was about the 'rise to power' Andromeda had 'find a new home for humanity' (which translated into the game as 'make the home you find livable), ME 3 was 'take Earth back' and Inquisition was 'Lead them or Fall'...and I think there was another slogan that I forgot about.

So just a thought: judging a game’s narrative solely by the standards of non-interactive literature is bound to yield incomplete results.

For example, Webster’s definition of “hero” has nothing to say about how player agency can both dilute and strengthen the role of a character in the narrative. One can argue that the PC can never truly be the hero, because the game allows that character to do non-heroic things. And I don’t just mean evil. You can play the Inquisitor very passively, as little more than an observer (or puppet, or useful idiot) of events driven by someone else. This is a general problem with RPGs, not specific to DA2.

But one can also argue that this role playing makes the definition of hero or “principle character” irrelevant. What matters more is the player’s concept of the character. A hero in the player’s own mind, as it were, whether the narrative intends them to be so or not.

So arguing over whether Hawke was the hero or not is saying more about your personal character concept of Hawke than anything else. If you were arguing over whether a novelization of the game, or a novel set in the DA universe that featured Hawke, made Hawke the hero, that would be a different story.

"Protagonist" is a word that is often misused. Are you sure Hawke is the protagonist of the story? Keeping in mind that the POV character isn't necessarily the protagonist. "Protagonist" and "hero" are often interchangeable, and would be the one driving the plot. People sometimes confuse "protagonist" with "character the readers are following" though.

Maybe the reason you're finding it difficult trying to figure out who's the antagonist is because Hawke isn't the one driving anything, and therefore there isn't a clear opposer if you take Hawke as the protagonist. Let's switch mindsets - Anders is the protagonist, now who's opposing?

Anyway, saying Hawke was a hero in the story isn't really relevant when discussing whether Hawke was the hero of the story.

How is the Arishok getting in the way of Hawke's goal? How is Meredith obstructing Hawke's goal? Remembering of course that Hawke's main goal has little to do with the ongoing political feud. If the Arishok or Meredith or Orsino are not obstructing Hawke, they aren't antagonists. Are they in conflict with Hawke or with each other?

The protagonist is the person who's driving the main events of the game. That person isn't Hawke.

To be fair, Tolkein himself considered Sam to be LOTOR's true hero .