63 réponses à ce sujet

[Torax]

KingNothing125 wrote...

I prefer the Mass Effect/Import method versus "canon" method. Players crafting their own stories, and the world reflecting their choices... that's the future of video game storytelling. It necessarily leads to exponentially more work for the developers, but it's worth it.

I only got around to playing Mass Effect a few months ago and I think it's one of the greatest series of all time because of its evolving story that takes into account what my various Shepards have done.

I think it's too late for the Warden, and that's sad because I would love to continue to my Warden's adventures. But I'd rather have fond memories of my Warden than play someone else's.

Mass Effect only really has a few things that change. It didn't have the overall "choices" though use the term loosely that Origins had.

Here is all it considered for ME 2.

1. Saved the Council or Didn't.

Not much in overall consequences or changes. Besides select species interaction. Gunshop Owners is angry for example. No matter what many distrust humans.

2. Udina or Anderson for Council.

Not much change there either. You get just different scenarios when talking to them. But hardly any effect on the character or the game.

3. Whatever you set up as your back ground.

Just like in the first game. It's hardly a difference.

4. Who you saved.

Yup one is dead and one isn't. G to the F'n G. It's pointless and in the end hardly makes me feel like it makes the story more compelling...

5. If Wrex is still alive.

See 4.


After that it's all of no consequence and in the end I hardly notice a difference to starting a new character in ME2 and importing one. Besides having a love interest in the past which in all honesty. Still has no greatness on the overall story or the world. The World hardly changes in that game. I'll type that again so you understand. THE WORLD HARLDY CHANGES IN THAT GAME.

Modifié par Torax, 12 avril 2011 - 12:33 .

[KingNothing125]

The story isn't over yet, though. Things could be wildly different in ME3. Consider, for example, the fate of Wrex.

Wrex leads the Krogan down a reformist path... less bound by tradition and more diplomatic towards aliens. If you killed Wrex (or started a fresh Shepard in ME2), Wreav is the polar opposite... a traditionalist, openly hostile towards aliens.

If ME3 follows a DA:O-style path of recruiting several different peoples to form an army, your choice to spare or kill Wrex may have drastic consequences on Tuchanka's willingness to join your cause.

Same thing re: killing/saving the Rachni queen. in ME2 she tells you she'll show up for your fight against the Reapers... if you saved her, that is. If not, then no Rachni.

ME3 is the conclusion, and could have drastically different endings based on all of your previous choices.

[Oneiropolos]

gangly369 wrote...

Oneiropolos wrote...

I think David Gaider has stated elsewhere that they actually have a lot of information on what players have chosen to do within DA:O, how this was gathered, I dunno. Could have to do with the achievements, but that wouldn't give them indication of who chose what in DAII. Honestly, if it mattered that much to Bioware, they could just ask "Are you willing to send your choices to Bioware?" at the end of each playthrough.

That said, I would not see even this as being 'binding' to them. It lets them know what the majority of players chose, but I would much rather that the WRITERS decide what needs to be done in order to make an awesome story, even if it's what I personally didn't choose. As someone stated, they didn't know how well DA:O would go over with the fans, so they gave you the option to kill ALOT of the companions. You could have sided with the templars and never gotten Wynne. You could leave Sten to die in Lothering, you could leave Lelaina to die in Lothering, you could kill Lelaina and Wynne at the sacred ashes, you could kill Shale at the Anvil of the Void scenario. You could kill Zevran when he first was introduced OR later with Taliesan. You could have Alistair executed.
.... the only ones I think you can't actually kill are Morrigan and Oghren. You can even kill yourself at the end. So you could make an argument that the stupid drunken dwarf and the 'daughter' of Flemeth are the only actual canon from the first game. Well. And Dog. OR You could go, "Clearly, they were just letting us make what choices we want to, but they're extreme options and if a person chose to do all that, they would have nothing to build another game -off of-." Which would mean that yes, Bioware disregarded your extremely homicidal actions in favor of actually coming up with a more compelling story. I'll cast my vote for the story any day.

I'm sorry but I just have to correct this (it's a pet peeve of mine). Oghren CAN BE KILLED! It's tough to do so, but it is very possible to kill him in Origins.

You may all continue discussing about how so and so should be dead and how you dont care if this is canon or if this is not, etc etc.

Well, I did say "I think" because I wasn't sure on Oghren. I actually have no idea how to kill him in Origins or I would have done so on my playthrough. I really dislike the character and never included him in my parties after the mandatory one. 

[brightblueink]

In Exile wrote...

The actual solution is to have very few choice so that they do not become combinatorially explosive. This is why - for example - you are not allowed to just play as if it was an open world and attempt to hill the Viscount/Arishok. So the answer to cannon is to force the player into a narrow track.

Yeah, I think this is the only way they can really allow the series to take your choices into account--which is why, I think, your choices are confined more to your character's personal growth and that of their companions in DA2, rather than major, Thedas-influencing choices. If they'd known from the beginning where the series was going like they seemed to with Mass Effect, then they'd probably be able to make it work, but the more choices the game gives you, the harder it is for the writers to continue the story. There's only so much Gaider and his team can do before they either write themselves into the corner or have to retcon some choices, I think. I don't know how many paths the devs can account for when they make a game, but I know it's not infinite. Eventually they'll hit a point where the game is too big, too branching, they can't tie all the different choices together, etc.

Which is why I'm fine with the choices we got in DA2. I still feel like I had controll over my character, but I also feel much more confident that DA2's story will flow more organically into the next game than the choices in DAO and Awakenings did into this game.

[In Exile]

I think another option (and I'd vote for this) is a standalone title where you can hear about changes in far off-lands but otherwise you are isolated. DA2 essentially tried to connect DA:O to it too much, and it made things seem contrived.

[Fast Jimmy]

Retconning is inevitable and, honestly, preferable. If not, then we can never visit Recliffe again, as there is a chance it was abandoned by the Warden and burned to the ground. We can never see Sten again, as it is possible he was left in Lotheringto die. We can never see Hawke's sibling again, as they possibly died in the Deep Roads or were killed by Hawke if they chose the opposite side.

If you honestly think Bioware is going to create full blown quests, story arcs or plot points, or even conversations of voice acting that go beyond a two minute long conversation like what we see with Anora/Allistair in DA2, then you are delusional. The money, time and planning are not there. Unless everyone on the forum will agree to, in writing, paying $100.00 for three copies of Dragon Age 3 a piece and will wait until 2015 for it to come out, then Bioware will go broke trying to code, write, plan, voice-over and animate even a small handful of these choices that most players will not see. In which case Bioware can't make any more games, because they are broke.

Video game designers are not fat cat millionaires who live in giant mansions. If they don't make money, we don't get any more games... simple as that. People's obsession with their previous choices could kill Bioware financially, or result in cheap tricks to give shallow winks to every possible choice, which is unsatisfying for everyone.

So pick a side. Have pale, weak references to your actions in previous games, or allow Bioware to retcon many of the more plot-crippling choices available and actually get to see places, characters and events that went outside of "that one playthrough you did just to see if it was possible."

Or, do what Elder Scrolls did, and have the game canon be all endings happened at once after Daggerfall. Hawke killed all the mages and defied the Templars after killing Anders, but also running off with him as his lover, while the Warden lies dead after slaying the Archdemon, but traveled with Morrigan through the Eluvian to take care of their human/elf/dwarven child... and Sten is tan and has horns.

[KingNothing125]

Anyone making the argument that implementing wide, differing story branches is too time consuming and costly is ignoring the KOTOR MMO. They're already doing everything you think they would never do: take forever and sink untold quantities of money into a game with a dizzying number of player choices and story branches.

A game with tons of story permutations may take long to finish, but the immersion would be unmatched... totally worth it.

[Augustei]

varcety wrote...

Ok, so, as we all know, our playing of the game is recorded in this site(characters, saves etc').
Now, imagine if each user will be allowed to choose his/her favourite playthrough of the game(a complete one of course), and the most pouplar player choices in the game will determine the canon!
For example, if in the majority of the playthroughs Leliana lives, then it would be canonically determined for the next games in the series that Leliana is alive. And same goes for the rest of the choices in the game.
It's kinda like democracy. The majority calls the shot.

I hope I'm clear enough.

What do you think?

No.

The current system works fine, there is no canon

[SleepyBird]

I'm guessing that the OP here is a straight male who played his character as a straight male, and SHOCKER wants a majority vote to declare his game canon. Gah, I'm just so tired of this mentality...

[brightblueink]

KingNothing125 wrote...

Anyone making the argument that implementing wide, differing story branches is too time consuming and costly is ignoring the KOTOR MMO. They're already doing everything you think they would never do: take forever and sink untold quantities of money into a game with a dizzying number of player choices and story branches.

A game with tons of story permutations may take long to finish, but the immersion would be unmatched... totally worth it.

Sure, but look at how much money they're sinking into it. Heck, that game's been blamed for DA2 being rushed--because they desperately needed to get more money flowing into the company.

I don't know if that's true or not, but it's hard to deny that it's something of a gamble. If it pays off--and I hope it will--it'll be worth it, but if it doesn't they're going to have some serious problems. They certainly couldn't do that with EVERY game, I don't think it'd be very viable as a business strategy.

[varcety]

SleepyBird wrote...

I'm guessing that the OP here is a straight male who played his character as a straight male, and SHOCKER wants a majority vote to declare his game canon. Gah, I'm just so tired of this mentality...

Well, yeah, my first playthrough was straight male rogue. But on the second playthrough I played a tough ass lesbian Hawke(who is in romance with Merrill).
Also, no, I didn't make this thread to promote my secret agenda about how Hawke should be like.

[sten_super]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

So pick a side. Have pale, weak references to your actions in previous games, or allow Bioware to retcon many of the more plot-crippling choices available and actually get to see places, characters and events that went outside of "that one playthrough you did just to see if it was possible."

Or, do what Elder Scrolls did, and have the game canon be all endings happened at once after Daggerfall. Hawke killed all the mages and defied the Templars after killing Anders, but also running off with him as his lover, while the Warden lies dead after slaying the Archdemon, but traveled with Morrigan through the Eluvian to take care of their human/elf/dwarven child... and Sten is tan and has horns.

This is fundamentally what it comes down to; if you want clear and strong references to major plot points, and you want those plot points to be free choice, then retconning is practically unavoidable.

My personal preference is for more of an Elder Scrolls-style model (not Daggerfall!) whereby what is retained between games is the lore and the setting, with oblique references to the main quest that the protagonist of the previous game HAD to undertake. These games feel like sequels without having to reflect a myriad of player choices.

[Fast Jimmy]

KingNothing125 wrote...

Anyone making the argument that implementing wide, differing story branches is too time consuming and costly is ignoring the KOTOR MMO. They're already doing everything you think they would never do: take forever and sink untold quantities of money into a game with a dizzying number of player choices and story branches.

A game with tons of story permutations may take long to finish, but the immersion would be unmatched... totally worth it.

There is a WORLD of difference between budgetting and financials for an MMO and a normal game title. With an MMO, you continue to pay to play the game on a monthly basis.

If Bioware charged you $10 every month that you owned a Dragon Age game, sure. They could get away with doing every side quest, conversation and eventuality you could ever dream of. You would also wind up spending $120 to play it over the course of a year, as opposed to the standard $60 to play it.

Also, there would likely be drastically less voice acted dialogue, less animated cut scenes, no romance options and a host of other things that an MMO doesn't deliver on besides dungeon crawling and equipment hoarding. Also, to use an MMO that hasn't even been released as proof that Bioware can accomplish something would be like me saying "Bioware only had a year and a half to release Dragon Age 2, so it shows they are capable of releasing a sequel in that time frame that will be as critically acclaimed and be up for Game of the Year in 2011" months before DA2 even came out.

Giving a reference to every character, choice and outcome possible in previous games is impossible. Picking and choosing which ones get brought back means whatever gets left by the wayside gets bemoaned by fan boys. But casting the net too wide and you have to scale back the production value of these references, like in Mass Effect 2 when it seems like every random NPC who you met in the first game somehow had your email.

So, unless all you want to see from Sten in the future is a note that says "Hi, you don't know me, but the Warden used to be my buddy. Can you mail me some cookies?" or, as suggested above, pay $120 to play the next Dragon Age game over the course of a year, then no... Bioware cannot financially afford to placate and mitigate every possible choice.

In the first Fallout game, you had the choice to help some raiders instead of defending a town. In the end game, it stated that the raiders wiped out the town, leaving no survivors. If you saved that town, it became a booming city and eventually the headquarter for the New California Republic, a major power in Fallout 2 and New Vegas.
If Obsidian had people say "but my character was a hardcore evil guy and supported Raiders! This is so untrue to my actions in the first game /rant" there would be no way to use the NCR for one set of people and have it be non-existent for others.

My point being, we aren't going to get a game series that can truly make a world that is ours to destroy or rebuild as we see fit, installment after installment. Eventually there has to be a point where developers throw up their hands and say "We can't do anything!" and wind up taking choice completely out of the equation... which is a little bit of what happened at the end of DA2, in my opinion.