6 réponses à ce sujet

[-Conspirator]

So, for Dragon Age: Origins we were promised many tough decisions with huge consequences. 50% of this promise were fulfilled.  We got lots of tough moral decisions and that is one of the main reasons I loved the game so much. But what about the consequences? Even though they looked huge, the difference in consequences between two options of a decision were minor. You first really start to notice this, when you play through the game a second time and choose to play different. Because although some consequences seem to be existent and quite big, you realise that they aren't. I don't think I need to list examples, you all know them too well.
Now that was obviously because of the limited game budget - creating more strands would have needed a much bigger amount of time and - as an implication of that - money.
Now with DA2 the budget should be considerably higher. Dragon Age: Origins was an extremely popular game and an awful lot of copies were sold.
Having said that, I sincerely hope that there will be more visible consequences in Dragon Age 2, because this was one of the most disappointing things about Dragon Age: Origins for me. Can we expect any devs' words on this topic?

[BlackyBlack]

-Conspirator wrote...

So, for Dragon Age: Origins we were promised many tough decisions with huge consequences. 50% of this promise were fulfilled.

IMO NONE of the choices were tough. My toughest was whether to sleep with Morrigan or Leliana. But they even made that one easy since I did both.

BioWare should really take cues from The Witcher or at least Alpha Protocol (though AP's weren't as tough as The Witcher's)

Modifié par BlackyBlack, 18 juillet 2010 - 12:05 .

[-Conspirator]

I must confess I haven't played the Witcher yet... *write a note on to-do list*..

Well, you made me think of another point. Not every decision was tough, that's true. What I hated most about some of the decisions, was, that there was a way to perfectly deal with the situation without harming anyone. The best example therefore is definitely Redcliffe. I mean what the hell, this had real potential. Killing either the boy or Isolde... but why did they include a third option there, where everyone can survive? That makes the others decisions look stupid. Same with the Brecilian Forest. Lifting the curse and with that killing Zathrian and Witherfang is the ideal solution - the others are kind of just for fun.
On the other hand I thought some decisions were quite tough, for example the dark ritual at the end or the king's election in Orzammar.

Modifié par -Conspirator, 18 juillet 2010 - 12:21 .

[Stefanocrpg_rev91]

Well, there were a lot of choices as you said, but also consequences were present, though they could do better in that part of the game.

But at the end, you could:



- choose to defend Lothering or let their abitants to death, with the consequence of avoided the battle in the defense of the town or to have more enemies to fight with when you go to Castle Redcliffe, and without the help of the Arle's knights;

- in that mission if you killed or cast out of the area Jowan, you haven't his help later with Connor, as if you killed the mages you don't have the possibility to save both Connor and Isolde;

- if you are a noble dwarf and f*** with the two ladies who want to become noble themselves during the origin, when you return to Orzammar you find her gave birth to your child and a new mission to do;

- in the mages quest there are some secondary missions that result in some random encounter fights;

- if you defeat Ser Cauthrien then you lost a very well done quest;

- in that quest you can either wait for your friends to rescue you or get out of troubles by your way, resulting in a different ways to solve the quest;

- in Arle Howe's dungeons you can free some people that later will help you at the Landsmeet, if you ignored them or you dont' do their missions you have more difficulties to having success with the nobles of Ferelden;

- at the Landsmeet you can go suddenly against Loghain, if you have the nobles' support, otherwise you have to fight your way to him;

- if you support Anora, she'll side with you and helped have success at the Landsmeet, if you say her that you don't want her queen, she'll side with Loghain and make more difficult to have success with the nobles;

- if you create a human noble, you can indeed become the king or the queen of Ferelden.



So, some consequences are present in the game. Actually more than many other rpg, except for Fallout (I mean 1 and 2, not the third), Arcanum and some other games.

Still I'd like to see more consequences to our actions in DA2, and it could be the case since the story is developed in ten years.

[UberDuber]

I love tough choices! gets me hooked on a game ... really does. Dont tell BioWare that though ... its my weakness.

[Collider]

Here is a related topic: http://social.biowar...1/index/3143659



Anyway, I agree. I want a better sense of the consequences to my decisions and I want them to matter.

[Turk Shinra]

I agree with The Witcher and Alpha Protocol having better choice and consequence systems than DA:O. I think the AP system would work better with Mass Effects mission structure but with the news of DA2's new dialog system, it seems as though Bioware might borrow a little from AP.



As for The Witcher, It would be nice to have more "gray morality" decisions in any game that has a dialog/choice system. It gets old always having everything be so black and white, good and evil. It be nice to have some less-than-holy templars, some blood mages (other than the PC) that haven't completely lost their minds and are actually trying to do some good, or a grey warden (again, other than the PC) that only uses his/her status to gain political power and material wealth.