1230 réponses à ce sujet

[LPPrince]

Terror_K wrote...

Both were always hybrids rather than pure RPGs or pure shooters, but ME1 had the balance better. ME2 weighted far too much on the shooter side and cut out or down far too many RPG elements. They took stats away from items, reduced the items entirely and made them completely linear and basically a shooter-based weapon system, they removed armour classes, they removed armour actually acting like armour, they removed omni-tools and biotic amps, they removed weapon and armour modding and replaced it with a linear upgrade system with no penalties or trade-offs meaning every character can easily upgrade everything without having to pick and choose (essentially allowing players to have their cake and eat it too), they cut the class skills in half (making less possible builds for each class), removed skill determining weapon capability, removed pretty much all non-combat skills, removed hacking, electonics and decryption skills determining ability to unlock or decrypt things, removed first aid, cut the persuasion skills into one and merged it with a combat skill, made XP completely meaningless by giving a set amount after every mission no matter how the mission is done (how do we know the XP is even real and not just an arbritrary number now?), removed different ways of completing a mission beyond Paragon/Renegade dialogue at the end, made most of the levels a linear line from A to B, took away planet exploration entirely, etc.

Save this post somewhere. Save it. Seriously.

[hk47_]

In Exile wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

hk47_ wrote...

better lighting, better shadows, better skyboxes, better textures

I count all of these as a waste of resources.

It's only a waste of resources if there was a disproportionate investment to produce them.

Now, I agree with you in principle: the most valuable content is gameplay, story etc. Graphics ought to be low on the priority list. The thing is, some basic level of energy must be invested in producing the graphics as well. I believe the argument hk47 is making is not that Bioware should have  invested more time into the graphic engine, but rather that the time they invested did not produce a quality engine. Put another way: if Bioware and the Witcher producers invest an equivalent amount of resources (relative to the total resources) in the graphics, and one product better graphics, I would think it is pretty clear that we can say that one is objectively better than the other without saying that it is a waste of resources at all.

In Exile understood what I was saying. I'd rather Bioware not spend any time at all making their own engine as that takes massive amount of work and resources. And in the case where development takes too long, engine can get old before the game even comes out. Bioware should just license CryEngine 3 or something good, customize it (if needed or just get used to it) with the tools they need to make RPG games and just start the game development process. Like this they don't waste the manpower and time needed to make an engine from scratch.
Creating a quality game engine takes a lot of expertise which not many gaming companies can claim to have. Obviously Bioware doesn't have the software engineers or they are all working on SWTOR.

@Sylvius the Mad

I think you and many people are failing to grasp that having a good looking game doesn't necessarily divert resources from the creative story writing. Many visually impressive games do indeed have weak storylines, but that is often because many companies fail to take story as seriously as Bioware does. Bioware has professional writers crafting their lore. They are not programmers or artists so you can't say Bioware is diverting resources from visuals to story. Everyone works as a team but people have their different jobs. While writers create the lore, concept artists, 3d modellers, 3d animators and programmers do their jobs as well. Many big developers are starting to hire professional writers nowadays. Just look at games like Assassin's Creed 2, GTA IV, Red Dead Redemption, Bioshock... all have excellent plot. Even the new Crysis has a professional novelist working on the story. So recently it's not that much of a shock to have a game with a good story (not like 10 years ago).

Still my point is that Bioware made a mistake with the Eclipse engine. They wasted 3-4 years on it, and development on Dragon Age was delayed for a long time.  After it was done EA delayed the release some more so that it could be ported on consoles. Bioware should just do what they did with Mass Effect, (which they started working on later and finished sooner than Dragon Age). And it looked good, save for some of the texture pop-in that the Unreal 3 engine in infamous for. So I say they should just use a state of the art engine like CryEngine3.
Cross platform development of fantastic looking games (with equally good Bioware story). AAA developers should make outstanding games in every aspect, not just one.

[Bryy_Miller]

Uzzy wrote...

I'm pretty sure that a 'Stand Alone Sequel' would be the best way to describe DA2, going by the given descriptions. Yay semantics.

Given that you can still import, I wouldn't say so. It's a unique narrative.

[SDNcN]

Terror_K wrote...

At least ME2 didn't suddenly change its art direction on us though. Seriously... what's with that?

People complained/pointed out that Dragon Age looked like any other generic fantasy setting so Bioware redid things to make it more distinct as a series. It will be interesting it people take to the new look.

[Terror_K]

SDNcN wrote...

People complained/pointed out that Dragon Age looked like any other generic fantasy setting so Bioware redid things to make it more distinct as a series. It will be interesting it people take to the new look.

I don't like it personally. Dragon Age looked fine to me, and now it just looks like something completely different. Bad move, IMO. DA2's stuff doesn't look any "less generic" to me, it just looks different. They should have just stuck with the same style, IMO... there was nothing wrong with it.

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

hk47_ wrote...

better lighting, better shadows, better skyboxes, better textures

I count all of these as a waste of resources.

Heh. Between you and me we've written off the whole list.

[hk47_]

Jallard wrote...



I don't understand what the contention is here about graphics? I thought the graphics in DA:O was just fine: Although the characters did tend to look like porcelain dolls at times. But I overlooked that because I was more interested in the interaction between the characters and the game play. Incidentally, even with all of this talk about DA 2 and where it is going --albeit graphically, I pre-ordered it today. Call it or me stupid or a good faith gesture on my part.

If you've played any other games that were released 2009 you would see how bad Dragon Age graphics are... But that's not even the main point. Visuals can be overlooked, but what about the ridiculously small areas? 5 years and no improvement since Kotor? Doesn't it take away from the experience of "interaction between the characters" when they all act like "porcelain dolls". It would've been nice to have some life in areas with NPCs actually walking about and getting on with their lives. Play Assassin's Creed 2 and you'll see how a city should feel like in a game.



Don't get me wrong I am not hating on Bioware and I am not anti-story or anti-character development. It's just that the game could've and should've been so much better.

[tbsking]

hk47_ wrote...

Jallard wrote...

I don't understand what the contention is here about graphics? I thought the graphics in DA:O was just fine: Although the characters did tend to look like porcelain dolls at times. But I overlooked that because I was more interested in the interaction between the characters and the game play. Incidentally, even with all of this talk about DA 2 and where it is going --albeit graphically, I pre-ordered it today. Call it or me stupid or a good faith gesture on my part.

If you've played any other games that were released 2009 you would see how bad Dragon Age graphics are... But that's not even the main point. Visuals can be overlooked, but what about the ridiculously small areas? 5 years and no improvement since Kotor? Doesn't it take away from the experience of "interaction between the characters" when they all act like "porcelain dolls". It would've been nice to have some life in areas with NPCs actually walking about and getting on with their lives. Play Assassin's Creed 2 and you'll see how a city should feel like in a game.

Don't get me wrong I am not hating on Bioware and I am not anti-story or anti-character development. It's just that the game could've and should've been so much better.

I was fine with the small areas. The only problem with the load screens was the memory leak bug, but even then I could play for hours before I noticed it and even then I just took it as a cue to take a break. Except for Orzammar, the Dwarven City of Loadscreens.

[Jimmy Fury]

hk47_ wrote...
I think you and many people are failing to grasp that having a good looking game doesn't necessarily divert resources from the creative story writing. Many visually impressive games do indeed have weak storylines, but that is often because many companies fail to take story as seriously as Bioware does. Bioware has professional writers crafting their lore. They are not programmers or artists so you can't say Bioware is diverting resources from visuals to story. Everyone works as a team but people have their different jobs. While writers create the lore, concept artists, 3d modellers, 3d animators and programmers do their jobs as well. Many big developers are starting to hire professional writers nowadays. Just look at games like Assassin's Creed 2, GTA IV, Red Dead Redemption, Bioshock... all have excellent plot. Even the new Crysis has a professional novelist working on the story. So recently it's not that much of a shock to have a game with a good story (not like 10 years ago).

Still my point is that Bioware made a mistake with the Eclipse engine. They wasted 3-4 years on it, and development on Dragon Age was delayed for a long time.  After it was done EA delayed the release some more so that it could be ported on consoles. Bioware should just do what they did with Mass Effect, (which they started working on later and finished sooner than Dragon Age). And it looked good, save for some of the texture pop-in that the Unreal 3 engine in infamous for. So I say they should just use a state of the art engine like CryEngine3.
Cross platform development of fantastic looking games (with equally good Bioware story). AAA developers should make outstanding games in every aspect, not just one.

You're clearly much more knowledgable about these things than I (that wasn't sarcasm either lol) so I have two questions.
1: What engine are they using for DA2? Have they confirmed they're sticking with eclipse? I haven't paid much attention to the technical aspects like this.
2:  Even with a great engine wouldn't there still have to be a trade off somewhere simply due to the data limitations of a dvd?  You mention that a game can have great visuals and a professional story, but would it be able to have both of those and RPG style customization and control with things like a wide variety of CC options, variable storylines, side quests, NPC's with depth, etc?
I honestly don't know much about things like this so I'm sincerely curious.

Modifié par Jimmy Fury, 17 juillet 2010 - 06:09 .

[hk47_]

Terror_K wrote...

SDNcN wrote...

People complained/pointed out that Dragon Age looked like any other generic fantasy setting so Bioware redid things to make it more distinct as a series. It will be interesting it people take to the new look.

I don't like it personally. Dragon Age looked fine to me, and now it just looks like something completely different. Bad move, IMO. DA2's stuff doesn't look any "less generic" to me, it just looks different. They should have just stuck with the same style, IMO... there was nothing wrong with it.

Yeah... Maybe it would've felt different if Dragon Age had Dragon Age 2's style from the get go. But now it just feels wrong somehow. Like it's Fable all of a sudden. Hawke, the woman mage, the dragon and the new fire look alright but the darkspawn look funny in a sad way and the environment is too bright.

@ SDNcN

I think what you are talking about is how people generally reacted to the Dragon Age plot, and not the way the game itself looked. I for one can't think of another bloody, dark fantasy rpg game that lets you do decapitations. (nvm Age of Conan did that - but I still think that Dragon Age has it's unique look)
What I remember is how people reacted to the Dragon Age story. "Just another generic fantasy, except the elves are poor and oppressed now..."

[Sylvius the Mad]

hk47_ wrote...

I think you and many people are failing to
grasp that having a good looking game doesn't necessarily divert
resources from the creative story writing. Many visually impressive
games do indeed have weak storylines, but that is often because many
companies fail to take story as seriously as Bioware does. Bioware has
professional writers crafting their lore. They are not programmers or
artists so you can't say Bioware is diverting resources from visuals to
story. Everyone works as a team but people have their different
jobs.

But each team member costs money, and everything that costs money impacts the developer's ROI.

AlanC9 wrote...

Heh. Between you and me we've written off the whole list.

I had noticed that.

[tbsking]

hk47_ wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

SDNcN wrote...

People complained/pointed out that Dragon Age looked like any other generic fantasy setting so Bioware redid things to make it more distinct as a series. It will be interesting it people take to the new look.

I don't like it personally. Dragon Age looked fine to me, and now it just looks like something completely different. Bad move, IMO. DA2's stuff doesn't look any "less generic" to me, it just looks different. They should have just stuck with the same style, IMO... there was nothing wrong with it.

Yeah... Maybe it would've felt different if Dragon Age had Dragon Age 2's style from the get go. But now it just feels wrong somehow. Like it's Fable all of a sudden. Hawke, the woman mage, the dragon and the new fire look alright but the darkspawn look funny in a sad way and the environment is too bright.

@ SDNcN

I think what you are talking about is how people generally reacted to the Dragon Age plot, and not the way the game itself looked. I for one can't think of another bloody, dark fantasy rpg game that lets you do decapitations. (nvm Age of Conan did that - but I still think that Dragon Age has it's unique look)
What I remember is how people reacted to the Dragon Age story. "Just another generic fantasy, except the elves are poor and oppressed now..."

Dragon Age's story was typical fantasy fair, but it deconstructed it at so many levels. The Elves were poor and downtrodden and otherwise nothing like the haughty Tolkienesque elves. The Dwarves were the standard miner/craftsmen but were so mired in caste-based oppresion and political stagnancy that they were nonexistant as a world power. Even the Darkspawn who were supposed to be the prototypical horde of evil were given that extra layer seeing as they had a religious explanation and a "real" explanation with implications that either one could be true.

This is all among others, of course.

[hk47_]

Jimmy Fury wrote...

You're clearly much more knowledgable about these things than I (that wasn't sarcasm either lol) so I have two questions.
1: What engine are they using for DA2? Have they confirmed they're sticking with eclipse? I haven't paid much attention to the technical aspects like this.
2:  Even with a great engine wouldn't there still have to be a trade off somewhere simply due to the data limitations of a dvd?  You mention that a game can have great visuals and a professional story, but would it be able to have both of those and RPG style customization and control with things like a wide variety of CC options, variable storylines, side quests, NPC's with depth, etc?
I honestly don't know much about things like this so I'm sincerely curious.

1. It's been confirmed that Bioware will use the same engine for DA2, which is their own engine called Eclipse.
"I can confirm that we're doing a lot of work on the Dragon Age
engine, and doing a lot of stuff to pump it -- to make it visually
super hot." - BioWare VP Greg Zeschuk
He said that recently at an interview. It seems to me that Bioware themselves know how bad (when compared to other recent games) Dragon Age tech was. They sure seem set on "fixing" the graphics which is why they want to go with a more stylistic art which is easier on an engine than the "realistic" style. 

2. That's really a good question. It depends really on how big they make the areas in the game. But there's really no problem to fit the game on two dvds if really needed. It's been done before. As for the RPG style controls and gameplay, it could be done on any engine. It doesn't matter that some of the better looking engines are usually used for first person shooters.

Bioware can easily (within a few months) make their own add-ons to the engine to give themselves a user interface that they could use for the making of an rpg ( things like camera controls, dialogue trees and point and click gameplay ). In any case it would take way less time to just add onto an engine instead of making one from scratch like they did for DA: O.

Mass Effect 1 and 2 use the Unreal 3 engine (also used by Gears of War, Bioshock and even a japanese rpg The Last Remnant). A good game engine can be used to make any kind game. From MMOs to shooters to rpgs to strategy games.

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
But each team member costs money, and
everything that costs money impacts the developer's ROI.

Which
is why some smaller developers can't afford to go the extra mile. Or
didn't used to think it was necessary.  I already
provided examples of many developers whose games go that extra mile
recently because it pays off in the end. Even Id Software (who invented
first person shooter genre with doom) have been saying they are
carefully crafting post apocalyptic shooter Rage's story. Believe it or
not they used to say that a first person shooter needed no story at all.
Quite a drastic change of philosophy.

Hiring a few professionals
to write a good story isn't such a big deal for companies that employ
tens if not hundreds of people. Bioware is one of the biggest in the
business. They have the money. Plus the better their games are the more
profit they make in the end.

Modifié par hk47_, 17 juillet 2010 - 06:43 .

[SDNcN]

hk47_ wrote...

@ SDNcN

I think what you are talking about is how people generally reacted to the Dragon Age plot, and not the way the game itself looked. I for one can't think of another bloody, dark fantasy rpg game that lets you do decapitations. (nvm Age of Conan did that - but I still think that Dragon Age has it's unique look)
What I remember is how people reacted to the Dragon Age story. "Just another generic fantasy, except the elves are poor and oppressed now..."

It was both. For example the visuals of the Darkspawn reminded people too much of the Orcs from the Lord of the Rings movie. That added people stating that the plot was a knock off of Lord of the Rings.

Yeah... Maybe it would've felt different if Dragon Age had Dragon
Age 2's style from the get go. But now it just feels wrong somehow. Like
it's Fable all of a sudden. Hawke, the woman mage, the dragon and the
new fire look alright but the darkspawn look funny in a sad way and the
environment is too bright.

I've mentioned in other threads that I believe the new Darkspawn match up much more closely to their background.

Their new armor could use work, but now they look like they just strap on a bunch of metal plates and run off to battle with some crudely made swords. I think that fits their theme as the mindless subhumans of the DA setting.

That and the Hurlocks becoming lipness albino humans feels closer to their possible origins as transformed humans who attempted to usurp the Maker.

[In Exile]

Not to mention that it makes them look like things spawned from the mother, which is important.



...Also, do we ever have an explanation for genlock mages? If they're drawn from dwarves, who have no magic because they lack a connection to the fade... why can genlocks and not shrieks use magic?

[hk47_]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
But each team member costs money, and everything that costs money impacts the developer's ROI.

Which is why some smaller developers can't afford to go the extra mile. Or didn't used to think it was necessary.  I already provided examples of many developers whose games go that extra mile recently because it pays off in the end. Even Id Software (who invented first person shooter genre with doom) have been saying they are carefully crafting post apocalyptic shooter Rage's story. Believe it or not they used to say that a first person shooter needed no story at all. Quite a drastic change of philosophy.

Hiring a few professionals to write a good story isn't such a big deal for companies that employ tens if not hundreds of people. Bioware is one of the biggest in the business. They have the money. Plus the better their games are the more profit they make in the end.

SDNcN wrote...
I've mentioned in other threads that I believe the new Darkspawn match up much more closely to their background.

Their new armor could use work, but now they look like they just strap on a bunch of metal plates and run off to battle with some crudely made swords. I think that fits their theme as the mindless subhumans of the DA setting.

That and the Hurlocks becoming lipness albino humans feels closer to their possible origins as transformed humans who attempted to usurp the Maker.

I don't know, the Hurlocks in DA2 reming me too much of Skelletor. Maybe they did look too much like the Orcs from Lotro, but what was so wrong with looking the way they did in Origins? I'm sure that the polygonal armour will be fixed but their faces just don't sit well with me.

In Exile wrote...

Not to mention that it makes them look
like things spawned from the mother, which is important.

...Also,
do we ever have an explanation for genlock mages? If they're drawn from
dwarves, who have no magic because they lack a connection to the
fade... why can genlocks and not shrieks use magic?

I've also been wondering about that!

Modifié par hk47_, 17 juillet 2010 - 06:52 .

[SDNcN]

In Exile wrote...

Not to mention that it makes them look like things spawned from the mother, which is important.

...Also, do we ever have an explanation for genlock mages? If they're drawn from dwarves, who have no magic because they lack a connection to the fade... why can genlocks and not shrieks use magic?

I remember one of the devs saying very vaguely that the Genlock originate from Dwarves, but aren't Dwarves, if that makes sense.

hk47_ wrote...

I don't know, the Hurlocks in DA2 reming me
too much of Skelletor. Maybe they did look too much like the Orcs from
Lotro, but what was so wrong with looking the way they did in Origins?
I'm sure that the polygonal armour will be fixed but their faces just
don't sit well with me.

I think the importaint thing is that they have recognizably human origins. Without background knowledge, I would have never guessed that any of the Darkspawn originated from the non-tainted species -- especially the Ogres.
I think their new faces look pretty cool up close though.

Modifié par SDNcN, 17 juillet 2010 - 07:03 .

[tbsking]

In Exile wrote...

Not to mention that it makes them look like things spawned from the mother, which is important.

...Also, do we ever have an explanation for genlock mages? If they're drawn from dwarves, who have no magic because they lack a connection to the fade... why can genlocks and not shrieks use magic?

Well, Genlocks aren't Dwarves, though they're spawned from Dwarven Broodmothers, and Emmisaries only appear during Blights IIRC, so it may have something to do with the Archdemon's influence. Again, IIRC, the Old Gods first taught man magic, didn't they?

[hk47_]

tbsking wrote...
Well, Genlocks aren't Dwarves, though they're spawned from Dwarven Broodmothers, and Emmisaries only appear during Blights IIRC, so it may have something to do with the Archdemon's influence. Again, IIRC, the Old Gods first taught man magic, didn't they?

And why is it that the Old Gods corrupt high dragons?
The very first think that I though when I saw the "arch-demon" was: "What a rip-off! That's clearly a dragon, and they clearly got lazy and didn't model a proper arch-demon!"

If anything the ogre looks more like what I had in mind of an arch-demon....

Modifié par hk47_, 17 juillet 2010 - 06:56 .

[Riona45]

tbsking wrote...

Again, IIRC, the Old Gods first taught man magic, didn't they?

That's what in-setting scholars tend to say, but it's not something that's been established as absolute truth.

[Terror_K]

What annoys me is that I just don't feel I can have faith in BioWare any more. After Mass Effect 2 came along as their first real disappointment for me and made me doubt the once near-perfect BioWare I at took solace in thinking, "well, at least Dragon Age is great and their side of things does nothing but good work (beyond the advertising anyway...) and I can trust Dragon Age to be a good strong RPG series that's consistent."



Looks like that's no longer the case. And as time goes on, I can't help but wonder if BioWare's best days are behind them and they're no longer the company I admired and loved so much.

[FlyingWalrus]

The art style honestly doesn't look all that different to me. It just looks more detailed and more current-gen, as it should. DA:O's graphics weren't terrible, but they certainly weren't very impressive either.

What concerns me more is the decision to switch to a narrative focused around one character. I guess they sort of did that with the first game, too, seeing how your origins and surname were mostly predetermined. I think I could live with it as long as the class customization and the ability to choose a race and gender remains intact.

Just because I liked the approach they took with ME2 doesn't mean I'll like it in DA2. However, I'll keep an open mind and wait and see how this turns out.

[naumutroi]

If Bioware wants killer graphics and be able to make a huge expansive living breathing world they should look into The Anvil game engine used by Ubisoft on Assassins Creed 2. Anvil has got some awesome technical features that let u create a world with an awesome visual treatment and a wide variety of gameplay with more opportunity for the player. I love the AI on Far Cry series and AssassinsCreed 2 since the bots learn from your gameplay and adjust "realistically".

[TheMadCat]

AlanC9 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

hk47_ wrote...

better lighting, better shadows, better skyboxes, better textures

I count all of these as a waste of resources.

Heh. Between you and me we've written off the whole list.

So I take it if Dragon Age was given a graphics overhaul and was put at the level of say, The Witcher or Mass Effect you both would be up in arms rioting seeing as BioWare wasted resources.

[naumutroi]

Jallard wrote...

naumutroi wrote...

Sequel: The most common approach is for the events of the second work to directly follow the events of the first, either picking up dangling plot threads or introducing a new conflict to drive the events of a second story. The origin of the sequel as we think of it today is most closely connected the novel which developed from the novella and romance traditions of the 17th century. It is impossible to say for sure when exactly  the history of the sequel begins, as the concept of the sequel in its loosest definition has presumably existed since the advent of storytelling. One of the earliest sequels was the Illiad, the Odyssey and the Aenead.

Stand-Alone Sequel: When sequels are set in the same universe but have little or no reference to their predecessors, the work is called a stand-alone sequel.. These works often do not require viewers to encounter the previous installments in order to understand them. Batman Forever is a stand alone sequel as the film is campy compared to its dark predecessors, its only reference to its predecessor Batman Returns is Dr Meridian Chase's line "Or do I need skin tight vinyl and a whip?" DA2 could be a "stand-alone sequel" just as Darkspawn Chronicles.

Companion Piece: A companion piece is a creative work that is produced as a complementary work to another stand-alone project or the original, but storywise has nothing to do with its predecessor. While a companion piece does not necessarily need to take place within the same "universe" as the predecessor, it must follow-up on specific themes and ideas introduced in the original work. It must also be intentionally meant by its creator to be viewed alongside or within the same context as the earlier work. It is also known as a "spiritual successor" as in DA: Origins is a "spiritual successor" to Baldur's Gate.

Sidequel: A sequel that allows substantial creative freedom is one that is set in the same Universe but with unrelated plots, and sometimes unrelated characters. One example of this is the Grand Theft Auto series, which contains a multitude of games, each of which follows a different character and storyline or as in the movie Soldier which is a sidequel of Blade Runner, but are set in the same fictional universe. A sidequel is also called a spin-off. DA2 could be a sidequel. Leliana's Song could be considered both a prequel and a sidequel to the events of DA: Origins and possibly even a companion piece or stand-alone.

Prequel: A sequel that portrays events which precede those of the original work, called a "prequel." These can often avoid the plot problems associated with having to deal with the consequences of the original (e.g. the death of an important character). However they pose the challenge of maintaining dramatic interest when the outcome is already known from the original work, so the focus is usually on the character interactions or revealing how the characters and situations of the original work developed. Examples are the Yoshi's Island video games. DA1 could be a prequel of DA2.

Midquel: A midquel is a sequel which can take place during a chronology gap within a single previously completed work such the DLC's from DA: Origins.

Parallel: A sequel can portray the events of a previously completed work from another perspective. As with a prequel, the focus is not on the outcome, but on the characters and previously unrevealed information. Darkspawn Chronicles could be put into this catagory.

Interquel: When there are already two or more completed works, an interquel can portray events which happen between them, bridging one story to the other. The interquel is therefore a sequel to one work and a prequel to another. DA: Awakenings can be considered to be this for now.

Distant: Sometimes there is a large chronological interval between the events in a completed work and its sequel. This can allow the creators additional freedom, since the characters and settings will not be expected to have as much in common. A distant sequel allows time for new conflicts to develop, and a distant prequel need not directly establish the setting for the original. One example is Knights of the old Republic to the two core Star Wars trilogies or the Hobbit to The Lord of the Rings.

Very educational piece. Thanks for the update on Sequels. Still though, it goes back to Bioware having creative license to change things as they see fit.  So, where do you think DA2 will fit in among those categories?

Know O' Prince.......of all the different types of sequels, which one will DA2 will be???   I know that the Almighty Gods of BioWare  will do as they will regardless much  like the Cimmerian God, Crom ...and... I know that i am not alone in wanting  DA2  to be a standard easy-peasy style  of sequel with the further adventures of our beloved intrepid Hero as he or she ... wild-haired, sullen-eyed, sword in hand, possessing the skills of perhaps a  thief, a warrior, or a mage, with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth,  treads the jeweled thrones of  Thedas under his or her Wade's Superior Dragonbone-plated boot. slaying the remnants of the Darkspawn hordes and rising to power to become a King...or maybe a Emperor by his or her own hand. .....but that....is another story.

Know also... O'   Prince...that based upon the current released intel, DA2  it seems is leaning to the stand-alone sequel  and  or the SideQuel or perhaps ....... <   >. hehehe....  I am sure that assessment will change as more intel is released.  Time will tell, and until March 2011 everything is still  just speculation and dust in the wind since it is still in development.