230 réponses à ce sujet

[crimzontearz]

Meltemph wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

first off there IS such thing as visual continuity and secondly just because an explanation was created (as far fetched as it is) as per why we NEVER say a horned Qunari in DAO that does not make this any less of a retcon. Qunari went from no horns, to horns....retcon

They gave an explanation... You may not like it but that does not mean they didnt give you one. It could very easily just be that they did not have time/ability/ect to add a model of the Qunari with horns and because of that, that is why you saw them w/o horns.

Also you trying to harp on "visual continuity" on a brand new setting is just wanting to complain about something. Although to be honest, what should I expect, after seeing so many people fly off the handle with forgotten realms and other D&D lore changes...

wait how exactly is DA2 a brand new setting??

So you think Thedas(DA2) is not a new setting?  Really?

that's like saying that NWoD New Orleans is a totally new Setting compared to NWoD Chicago and therefore all werewolves involved in this "new setting" should be summarily made so that they only have 2 alternate forms and not 4....which also includes the New Orleans ones

[crimzontearz]

Meltemph wrote...

 

Have you seen the shreiks?

They have pointy ears that seemed to fit, specially sense they were all "rogueish" to me.  /shrug

I mean, the shrieks didn't grow new body parts so to speak, they just looked less humanoid like.   Ogres were quite literally near completely different.

did you look at their freaking double mandibles??????? do elves have double mandibles??????

Edit:

Modifié par crimzontearz, 30 janvier 2011 - 11:15 .

[Jimmy Fury]

crimzontearz wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

So crimzontearz, you never honestly wondered why the **** Ogres had horns? You NEVER wondered if qunari other then the ones you saw had horns? Cause I know I did. There was a consistent look between darkspawn until you got to Qunari.

no more than how I never wondered why shrieks have double mandibles and elves do not......

Elves are cockroaches.

[ladydesire]

Mikey_205 wrote...

It's about creating a sense of continuity and now having my suspension of disbelief eroded by a terrible retcon. I really hate retcon because I just think its an admission that enough wasn't done the first time around. Don't release something if you aren't happy to live with the quality. It also implies that insufficient planning was put into the system. This actually extends to the idea that you need to start at level 1 in every game. BG1 let you get powerful and BG2 let you get more powerful in the same system. I don't understand why Bioware feels the need to pull the rug out on half their stuff rather than do a little planning for gradual growth across two games or a trilogy as is more preferable in RPGs (this is more a moan about ME1 and 2).

What if the freakish appearance of some of the character types from DAO, that people are calling a retcon, are actually part of the overall exaggeration that Varric is doing in telling the story of the Champion of Kirkwall?

[crimzontearz]

Jimmy Fury wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

So crimzontearz, you never honestly wondered why the **** Ogres had horns? You NEVER wondered if qunari other then the ones you saw had horns? Cause I know I did. There was a consistent look between darkspawn until you got to Qunari.

no more than how I never wondered why shrieks have double mandibles and elves do not......

Elves are cockroaches.

cute

also you can refute the fact that any retractive change is a retcon, sadly tho according to the definition of retcon it actually is as much as you dislike it

[Joy Divison]

AlexXIV wrote...

People don't fear change in general. They just don't understand if something is getting changed for the worse or if the change wasn't necessary in their eyes.

Well, I for one, am jealous that you have the game, played it, know the story, and obviously know the change was unneccessary.

[Meltemph]

crimzontearz wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

 

Have you seen the shreiks?

They have pointy ears that seemed to fit, specially sense they were all "rogueish" to me.  /shrug

I mean, the shrieks didn't grow new body parts so to speak, they just looked less humanoid like.   Ogres were quite literally near completely different.

did you look at their freaking double mandibles??????? do elves have double mandibles??????

Calm down there skippy, no need to get worked up.  I would consider the mandibles to be a fairly minor cosmetic change, physically, compared to the grotesque nature of Ogre's by comparison to their race.

That's like saying that NWoD New Orleans is a totally new Setting compared to NWoD Chicago and therefore all werewolves involved in this "new setting" should be summarily made so that they only have 2 alternate forms and not 4....which also includes the New Orleans ones

You either missed the point or are completely ignoring it on purpose.  The point is that with new settings things are more malleable and subject to artistic changes, then a setting with years behind it.  There is still a lot of crap they are working on.  

[AlexXIV]

crimzontearz wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

So crimzontearz, you never honestly wondered why the **** Ogres had horns? You NEVER wondered if qunari other then the ones you saw had horns? Cause I know I did. There was a consistent look between darkspawn until you got to Qunari.

no more than how I never wondered why shrieks have double mandibles and elves do not......

Well I for one didn't know for a while that Ogres are Qunari. I didn't even connect any darkspawn to a race. I mean if a corruption happens it could vary from person to person even if they were the same race to begin with. When I learned the darkspawn races represent an uncorrupted race I wondered indeed. But again the corruption could have been the reason for the horns. As it was for the size and the ape-like face. They looked like giant gorillas with horns.

Now I find it unlikely that a humanoid would grow horns of that size, I find it unlikely that missing such a prominent feature would actually be seen as superior instead of inferior, and I find it unlikely that the presence or absence of horns would qualify a supposedly intelligent and civilized creature for a special place in the world. They said the Beresaad was meant to be sort of diplimats, so they didn't look too alien. But for once everyone recognizes a Qunari as such anyway, and also why not bear your racial trademark with pride? The whole thing makes a lot of unsense for me. Hence I would have preferred the Qunari stayed the same as in DA:O and the horns of the ogres would be explained with 'that's how the darkspawn corruption works'.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 30 janvier 2011 - 11:28 .

[AlexXIV]

Joy Divison wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

People don't fear change in general. They just don't understand if something is getting changed for the worse or if the change wasn't necessary in their eyes.

Well, I for one, am jealous that you have the game, played it, know the story, and obviously know the change was unneccessary.

We can talk about it in 2 months again if you're still around. I'm curious to see the reasons why it was necessary. And if it turns out I was wrong I will gladly admit it, but I am 99.9% sure it won't happen.

[crimzontearz]

Meltemph wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

 

Have you seen the shreiks?

They have pointy ears that seemed to fit, specially sense they were all "rogueish" to me.  /shrug

I mean, the shrieks didn't grow new body parts so to speak, they just looked less humanoid like.   Ogres were quite literally near completely different.

did you look at their freaking double mandibles??????? do elves have double mandibles??????

Calm down there skippy, no need to get worked up.  I would consider the mandibles to be a fairly minor cosmetic change, physically, compared to the grotesque nature of Ogre's by comparison to their race.

That's like saying that NWoD New Orleans is a totally new Setting compared to NWoD Chicago and therefore all werewolves involved in this "new setting" should be summarily made so that they only have 2 alternate forms and not 4....which also includes the New Orleans ones

You either missed the point or are completely ignoring it on purpose.  The point is that with new settings things are more malleable and subject to artistic changes, then a setting with years behind it.  There is still a lot of crap they are working on.  

uh....it took them what 5 years to produce DAO? and after 5 Years the lore is still "this" malleable?

ok then I guess the WoD spoiled me, at least WW told you "these are temporary rules for these creatures until we publish the full book, take them with a grain of salt"

[Jimmy Fury]

crimzontearz wrote...
cute

also you can refute the fact that any retractive change is a retcon, sadly tho according to the definition of retcon it actually is as much as you dislike it

You done went and hurt my pwecious widdle feelings.
or...
You could read the part where I said a retroactive addition is not the same as a retroactive change. Because it isn't. New information that does not alter established information is a very different situation than new information that does alter established information.

[rabidhanar]

I had no idea that the Qunari in the trailer was a Qunari until I went onto these forums. I thought it was either A) an ogre or a pride demon



Whether this is a retcon or not, this is a change that I personally dislike...my opinion deal with it.

The reasoning better be really good behind all the changes, or I will be very upset with Bioware. If the reasoning is just to change the Qunari into more bestial shapes to vilify them as the antagonists in DA2 I will be both annoyed and dismayed.



As to those people who disliked how different the Ogres looked compared to the Qunari...I was fine with them. I mean look at either the shrieks or the broodmothers, if the other races can be changed that much by the taint, the look of the ogres seemed acceptable. So they grew horns and got larger, better than growing a carapace and mandibles or x amount of tenticles and breasts. Just looking at the Dwarf female compared to a broodmother was very funny to me. I guess they swell up like a termite queen or something, still a much more extreme change compared to the simple ogres.

[Meltemph]

uh....it took them what 5 years to produce DAO? and after 5 Years the lore is still "this" malleable?

Yes, because in those 5 years all they were working on is lore... Yes DA is a young setting and even if all they worked on was lore in those 5 years it takes most a lot longer to come up with a massive brand new setting like DA/Thedas. I mean, this is the biggest new setting I've seen come out in decades, personally.



Also, you are comparing settings that don't immediately have to fit itself in the same visual medium that DA has/had to.

[crimzontearz]

Jimmy Fury wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...
cute

also you can refute the fact that any retractive change is a retcon, sadly tho according to the definition of retcon it actually is as much as you dislike it

You done went and hurt my pwecious widdle feelings.
or...
You could read the part where I said a retroactive addition is not the same as a retroactive change. Because it isn't. New information that does not alter established information is a very different situation than new information that does alter established information.

uh, you WOULD be right if they added the race altogether without ever having given info aboout it...... but as it is they altered it in saying that the vast  majority of the Qunari are born with horns which was never EVER mentioned in any of the codex entries even the ones that detailed the Qunari wars. How does that NOT alter our established informations?

[crimzontearz]

Meltemph wrote...

uh....it took them what 5 years to produce DAO? and after 5 Years the lore is still "this" malleable?

Yes, because in those 5 years all they were working on is lore... Yes DA is a young setting and even if all they worked on was lore in those 5 years it takes most a lot longer to come up with a massive brand new setting like DA/Thedas. I mean, this is the biggest new setting I've seen come out in decades, personally.

Also, you are comparing settings that don't immediately have to fit itself in the same visual medium that DA has/had to.

about the length of time we might have to agree to disagree, 5 years, to me, is an incredibly long time for a setting, in 5 years some 20+ supplements can be published for a given setting and that is solely "lore" supplements in a medium that required a ****load of time for editing and formatting which videogame lore does NOT have to deal with in its basic form.

[AlexXIV]

Guys I said it is a retcon because it is a change that is important to me. Retcon is just shorter than 'imo important change'. I could have said imoic. It doesn't matter though since this thread is not about whether it is a retcon or not, it is about why some people hate how the Qunari have been redesigned. And anything I wrote is why I do hate it. Despite the fact that I also like the look of the new Qunari, just not the fact that they are the same Qunari as in DA:O, aka Sten. And I don't like how the lore changed with the redesign as well.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 30 janvier 2011 - 11:43 .

[Meltemph]

Whether this is a retcon or not, this is a change that I personally dislike...


The reasoning better be really good behind all the changes, or I will be very upset with Bioware. If the reasoning is just to change the Qunari into more bestial shapes to vilify them as the antagonists in DA2 I will be both annoyed and dismayed.

As to those people who disliked how different the Ogres looked compared to the Qunari...I was fine with them. I mean look at either the shrieks or the broodmothers, if the other races can be changed that much by the taint, the look of the ogres seemed acceptable. So they grew horns and got larger, better than growing a carapace and mandibles or x amount of tenticles and breasts. Just looking at the Dwarf female compared to a broodmother was very funny to me. I guess they swell up like a termite queen or something, still a much more extreme change compared to the simple ogres.

See, why can't people just post like that, instead of getting all dramatic?  

Me personally, when I initially saw the Qunari in game, I was fairly let down, seeing as they were nothing more then big humans to me.  And then when I learned each race had its own darkspawn look, I was more let down with the Quanri model.  The broodmother look, to me was a different thing, because all the females were completely mutated, compared to their original race, where as the males had much more in common with their counterparts.  

Shrieks to me outside of the mandibles(which to me was a small cosmetic) looked to fit the part(even though they did look more different then Gen's and Hur's) and I could still see elves with shrieks(the ears and skinny frame, followed by the dexterous look to them).  However, the ogre's... well, there were not any similarities that I saw at all.

[ladydesire]

crimzontearz wrote...

about the length of time we might have to agree to disagree, 5 years, to me, is an incredibly long time for a setting, in 5 years some 20+ supplements can be published for a given setting and that is solely "lore" supplements in a medium that required a ****load of time for editing and formatting which videogame lore does NOT have to deal with in its basic form.

This assumes that the developers don't put it down in digital form as an internal reference, which I think is highly unlikely. Also, D&D has been around close to 40 years, and it's only been through 4 major revisions in that time.

[crimzontearz]

AlexXIV wrote...

Guys I said it is a retcon because it is a change that is important to me. Retcon is just shorter than 'imo important change'. I could have said imoic. It doesn't matter though since this thread is not about whether it is a retcon or not, it is about why some people hate how the Qunari have been redesigned. And anything I wrote is why I do hate it. Despite the fact that I also like the look of the new Qunari, just not the fact that they are the same Qunari as in DA:O, aka Sten. And I don't like how the lore changed with the redesign as well.

actually

Retcon = Retractive Continuity

it's not really a matter of importance.....

[AlexXIV]

crimzontearz wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Guys I said it is a retcon because it is a change that is important to me. Retcon is just shorter than 'imo important change'. I could have said imoic. It doesn't matter though since this thread is not about whether it is a retcon or not, it is about why some people hate how the Qunari have been redesigned. And anything I wrote is why I do hate it. Despite the fact that I also like the look of the new Qunari, just not the fact that they are the same Qunari as in DA:O, aka Sten. And I don't like how the lore changed with the redesign as well.

actually

Retcon = Retractive Continuity

it's not really a matter of importance.....

Well I was just saying I don't like the change. If retcon was the wrong word it doesn't even matter to my points as such since they are not based on whether it is a retcon or not.

[Meltemph]

about the length of time we might have to agree to disagree, 5 years, to me, is an incredibly long time for a setting, in 5 years some 20+ supplements can be published for a given setting and that is solely "lore" supplements in a medium that required a ****load of time for editing and formatting which videogame lore does NOT have to deal with in its basic form.

But those five years were not just "making lore" but making stories inside that lore that play well in a video game and making sure there are models for that lore in the game that is being talked about. You have to think about a lot more then what just the artists want when it comes to video games.

[crimzontearz]

ladydesire wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

about the length of time we might have to agree to disagree, 5 years, to me, is an incredibly long time for a setting, in 5 years some 20+ supplements can be published for a given setting and that is solely "lore" supplements in a medium that required a ****load of time for editing and formatting which videogame lore does NOT have to deal with in its basic form.

This assumes that the developers don't put it down in digital form as an internal reference, which I think is highly unlikely. Also, D&D has been around close to 40 years, and it's only been through 4 major revisions in that time.

because the average lifespan of a major revision is about 10 years.....

[crimzontearz]

Meltemph wrote...

about the length of time we might have to agree to disagree, 5 years, to me, is an incredibly long time for a setting, in 5 years some 20+ supplements can be published for a given setting and that is solely "lore" supplements in a medium that required a ****load of time for editing and formatting which videogame lore does NOT have to deal with in its basic form.

But those five years were not just "making lore" but making stories inside that lore that play well in a video game and making sure there are models for that lore in the game that is being talked about. You have to think about a lot more then what just the artists want when it comes to video games.

the same can be said for other media who have to deal with multiplayer and multichronicle balancing as well as specific setting as well as adventures/chronicles to be periodically released. Lore is not the "only" thing a pen and paper company deals with but after 5 years or even only 2 certain details are established.

[Jimmy Fury]

crimzontearz wrote...
uh, you WOULD be right if they added the race altogether without ever having given info aboout it...... but as it is they altered it in saying that the vast  majority of the Qunari are born with horns which was never EVER mentioned in any of the codex entries even the ones that detailed the Qunari wars. How does that NOT alter our established informations?

My apologies you clearly have a copy of Grey's Qunari Anatomy that am I unfamiliar with because I have never seen anything that establishes the detailed anatomy of the race.
Nothing ever said the qunari don't have horns so saying they do changes absolutely nothing.
-edit- saying some do changes nothing.

Modifié par Jimmy Fury, 30 janvier 2011 - 11:52 .

[Meltemph]

the same can be said for other media who have to deal with multiplayer and multichronicle balancing as well as specific setting as well as adventures/chronicles to be periodically released. Lore is not the "only" thing a pen and paper company deals with but after 5 years or even only 2 certain details are established.

It just seems to me like you are just trying to find anything you can, wrong with what they did, because you don't personally like the change(which you've already said you did not).