WingsandRings wrote...
And if they did go ahead and do a second DA:O, then guess what? Everyone would be disappointed and say it was just a "watered down copy" of the first one, and that there was nothing actually new or interesting in the second 2 that hadn't already been done in the first.
And this whole "we can't customize our characters" thing confuses me. In my experience with RPGs, it's the choices you make IN the game, as opposed to what you do at the beginning (whether it's picking out a hairstyle or playing through a 40 minute origin story) that really customize your character and make him or her different from the other characters you've played. So far with DA:O I've played 1 HNF and 2 Elves (1 city elf, one mage elf) and guess what? It's the dialogue and behavior choices I made that have made them different. My HNF and city elf were both pretty do-gooders, but my mage is a bitter bitter lady. That's what makes the game interesting. Being giving those choices. And I would THINK, if Bioware knows what they're doing, that with the limitation of 1 main character, the directions you're going to be allowed to take him or her, the amount of character customization within the game itself, will be much much broader.
Let me explain why I disagree. My rebuttal to your point is these two games:
Baldur's Gate and Baldur's Gate 2.
BG2 is very similar to BG, on the surface. You could call it a "second" Baldur's Gate because...well...it is. And yet it was universally praised and lauded, not only for its own merits, but for dramatically improving on the series. Despite using the exact same game-engine, having the same major characters, and same overall concept, the game was recognized as a dramatic step forward for the series. NO ONE was disappointed with Baldur's Gate 2. The writing and story-telling improved dramatically but
so did the character customization. They did not sacrifice one element of the series to improve the other, they improved the series as a whole.
They also did not fix what was not broken. The character creation was the same, but with expanded options. The combat played the same, yet was still improved upon technically and aesthetically.
What you are describing, as far as characters being based on the "in-game" choices directly applies to Mass Effect. This is a series where you are pigeon-holed into playing the character of "Shepard". Everyone has their own "Shepard" but in the end...it is ALWAYS Shepard. This character is not "you". It is not your vision of a character. It is Bioware's vision of a character, which you then have mild control over.
The reason that many players prefer dramatic character customization at the beginning is because any "customization" that occurs in-game via dialogue/etc. is merely illusory. It isn't real. Your character still moves along a finite set of paths, with a finite set of goals, towards an inevitable conclusion. The sole area where many people have the majority of their ability to influence their character, whether aesthetically or in demeanor, is in the actual character generation.
The elimination of this real customization means that you will solely be able to move a predefined character along a tiny number of paths. The character is no longer "you". It is someone else, and you're merely helping them along their journey, but the journey is no longer your own.
The Origin system was the most uniquely implemented manner of character customization that I have ever seen in an RPG. The Origins were a PART of the customization, not separate from it. They were not a part of the "overall" story. The story began at Ostagar, but the customization didn't end until your Origin story did. In Baldur's Gate you could choose to be an elf. But you never really saw what that meant. You just played a character that had the word "elf" on the character sheet, just like in most RPG's. With the Origins you were able to live your character's past, not just click on it and then begin a game that had nothing to do with what you had just chosen.
Rather than scrapping this beautiful system, it should solely have been improved upon.
MKDAWUSS wrote...
So what's the subtitle of DA2?
I'm
not sure they have one yet, or are even going to make one, which is
Wings' point. She's saying that DA2 does not have the Origins subtitle
and thus you should not expect it to be similar to Origins (or to have
the origin system).
Modifié par 17thknight, 12 juillet 2010 - 04:00 .
Retour en haut
), yet it should be HL3:EP1/etc. So I don't pay that much attention to titles. They probably chose it because simply 'Dragon Age: Origins' sounds better than 'Dragon Age' imo.
