893 réponses à ce sujet

[Morroian]

kyles3 wrote...

If nothing's going to really happen to anyone, if the slate's going to be wiped clean for DA3, then why bother?

This is a what if story just like his novel not canon. 

[Sabariel]

I would rather it be a DLC than a comic *wistful sigh*

[kyles3]

tmp7704 wrote...

kyles3 wrote...

But in the game you can just do another playthrough and make things turn out however you want; Alistair's fate is ultimately up to you.

Yes, but the question was whether people can find an event moving even when it's something that isn't 100% fixed. And the experience shows, they can.
 

If nothing's going to really happen to anyone, if the slate's going to be wiped clean for DA3, then why bother? What are the stakes? What reason is there to get invested in this story?

Why do people bother to write and read fan-fiction? None of what's written in these stories 'happen' in the sense you use this word. It doesn't need to be about "stakes", it can be simply about enjoying a well-written story able to invoke reader's emotions.

My point is that I think they're limiting the amount of impact their stories can have. Can I be moved by the death of a character whose fate I determine? Sure. But it doesn't have the  "gut-punch" quality that the writers have told us that they look for. If anything happens to Alistair in this comic that I don't like, then so what? He was only a theoretical Alistair anyway.

I'm assuming, by the way, that non-canon stories are going to become a regular occurence within the DA universe from now on. That's why I worry about the integrity being eroded away from the world and the characters the writers have created. If this turns out to be a one-time thing for this comic, then it's much ado about nothing and I'll gladly cop to being a silly goose.

[panamakira]

1) Alistair looks horrible in that illustration and I hope they re-do that.

2) This looks to be pretty fun but I think it should be taken for the lore expansion and not "Isabella left me.....Alistair is dead...etc"

In my game none of these things matter since I know what I did with Alistair and the other characters but I'm curious to know what direction will Mr. Gaider take in regards to these characters. It seems to me that whatever he had initially envisioned for them to do without the players interpretation will be portrayed in these comic books.

What does their past/present/future look like in these comics? Was Alistair meant to be King or roam Thedas as part of the Wardens? Is he married or is he drunk somewhere in Kirkwall? Did Isabela stay with the Champion or decided to travel again? What happened to Varric after speaking with Cassandra?

I'm curious about it and can't wait to read them. Alistair is my favorite DA character so I'd love to know more about his past since it always seemed elusive in the game.

[ElvaliaRavenHart]

I'd have preferred this to be an expansion to DAO instead of a comic book. No print, just digital? Hmmmm. I'd have preferred the print.

[Foolsfolly]

ElvaliaRavenHart wrote...

I'd have preferred this to be an expansion to DAO instead of a comic book. No print, just digital? Hmmmm. I'd have preferred the print.

Books in general are always better in print. I can't tell you why. All the cliche reasons seem false to me. I just like comics and books in print more than in digital.

[Foolsfolly]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

ArtRogue wrote...

Maria13 wrote...

I guess there is the possibility that Flemeth and her ilk ARE the dragons... After all the first one in modern times was seen shortly after Maric and Loghain met her.

I think so too. When Hawke meets Flemeth for the first time and asks her about her shapeshifting, she said something like, "maybe I am a dragon."

Well, it'll contradict the devs' own words that dragons are just animals, no more magically inclined than bears or wolves.

If they turn out to be magical shapeshifting beasts who can talk after all, I'll be disappointed.

But there is some small evidence that they are magical. Their blood grants powers like darkspawn blood grants corruption (and also powers but mostly death and madness).

True human, elven blood holds power to as seen with Blood Magic. But to the best of my knowledge drinking elven/human/dwarven blood does not grant you powers.

[FedericoV]

simfamSP wrote...
People are focusing so much on whether this is canon or not it becomes immature! Just look at it this way: it's his canon, not yours. There is nothing to it. But what we learn through this comic is always going to be the same.

SimfamSP: I agree with the general sentiment of your post (I mean, some people are so fixated and passionate with their canon that they are beginning to look ridiculous... imho, their fixation is one of the cause of DA2 lack of choice and consequences... be carefull what you wish for).

But I want to make you a question: how can we learn something interesting or true if it's just an "alternate" DA universe? What Gaider explains in the comic could be untrue for the games. That's what I do not like about the idea behind DA franchise products. There is no continuity. They do not improve the lore of the world, they simply creates more complication and generally introduce more question than they solve in the DA metaplot.

PS: I can't resist... anti-combic book elitism from gamers... not only gamers, but fantasy role playing gamers interested in fanfiction. Like if "old school RPG" were not the geekiest and most munchikin kind of entarteinment on earth. LOLOLOLOL!

[mousestalker]

One serious point

They missed out when they did not hire Aimo Ahmed as the artist. Chad Hardin is an excellent artist. But Aimo gets Dragon Age.

[Maria13]

Yep, Mouse is SOOOOOOOOOOOO right, Aimo is totally on the DA wavelength.

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

Blacklash93 wrote...

Gaider also said at one point before Origins came out that there would be no golem like HK-47. Then we had Shale.

I don't know anything about HK-47, so please forgive my ignorance here...how was Shale similar, besides being a construct? 

Yeah... And I think the properties of dragon blood and bones throws the theory that there's nothing magical about them out of the window.

Just because those components have uses in magic doesn't mean they are intrinsically magical. Dragonbone simply holds certain runes and enchantments better than lesser materials, and ancient magisters (possibly due to the fact their Old Gods were dragons) believed the remains of dragons were suffused with power.

As for blood, blood is always powerful in magical circles. The fact that dragon's blood is more potent than that of lesser creatures could be for any number of reasons. The codex entry on Dragon's Blood alone states that it loses some of its power if the dragon you got the blood from dies.

I'd be disappointed if they could ALL talk and do magic and what-have-you, but some dragons should be involved in the story. It is called DRAGON Age, after all.

So far there's been a dragon in both games, and almost all the DLCs. For a nearly-extinct creature they're doing well.

Foolsfolly wrote...

But there is some small evidence that they are magical. Their blood grants powers like darkspawn blood grants corruption (and also powers but mostly death and madness).

True human, elven blood holds power to as seen with Blood Magic. But to the best of my knowledge drinking elven/human/dwarven blood does not grant you powers.

Like I said above, all blood grants power. Blood sacrifices are hardly unknown in the DA lore, but what sort of power and how strong it is likely depends on the being being bled. A human is probably a better blood-battery than a rat, and a dragon better than a human. Is it size that matters? Longevity? Is a mundane slave's blood weaker than a mage slave's blood? Who knows, but a mundane slave's blood still grants power.

In Origins, drinking the blood of a wyvern granted you the Reaver spec. DA2 says it's dragon blood. So it works for both?

I'm not saying dragon's blood can't have strange effects. But I am disputing that because of these effects, dragons are somehow magical creatures.

I will end this by noting that the Drake's Fall codex entry mentions 'primordial dragons' that were apparently similar to the Old Gods. If that isn't religious rambling, it's possible the dragons of the Dragon Age era (that we've seen) are a devolved version of what they used to be. Perhaps they were magical creatures once, and have lost their powers like some other races (eg. dwarves -- who can however work with lyrium).

[Herr Uhl]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

In Origins, drinking the blood of a wyvern granted you the Reaver spec. DA2 says it's dragon blood. So it works for both?

Isn't the first wyvern present in MotA?
Edit:

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

Blacklash93 wrote...

Gaider also said at one point before Origins came out that there would be no golem like HK-47. Then we had Shale.

I don't know anything about HK-47, so please forgive my ignorance here...how was Shale similar, besides being a construct? 

The similarity is likely from her regarding anything not golem as squishy, kind of like HK-47 and meatbags.

There is difference in character though. It is akin to calling Alistair Carth or Morrigan Bastila.

Modifié par Herr Uhl, 17 octobre 2011 - 10:38 .

[ladyofpayne]

This is good. But don't like Antiva. Orlais is the best.

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

[quote]Herr Uhl wrote...

[quote]Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

In Origins, drinking the blood of a wyvern granted you the Reaver spec. DA2 says it's dragon blood. So it works for both?
[/quote]

Isn't the first wyvern present in MotA?[/quote]

We see our first wyvern in MotA. We can hear they exist in Origins, though.

Unless the writers were just using 'dragon' and 'wyvern' interchangably without thinking about it back then, which is entirely possibly. Maybe Kolgrim had a bit too much of the ceremonial wine.

Edit:
[quote]Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

I don't know anything about HK-47, so please forgive my ignorance here...how was Shale similar, besides being a construct? 
[/quote]

The similarity is likely from her regarding anything not golem as squishy, kind of like HK-47 and meatbags.

There is difference in character though. It is akin to calling Alistair Carth or Morrigan Bastila.
[/quote]

Yeah, that's what I thought.

@Blacklash - I do agree, however, that just because the game or the devs have said something in the past doesn't mean they won't change their mind at some point. They simply seemed rather emphatic 'back in the day' about stating dragons were not magical or intelligent beings. They even poked fun at people who expected/wanted otherwise.

[Seagloom]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...

The similarity is likely from her regarding anything not golem as squishy, kind of like HK-47 and meatbags.

There is difference in character though. It is akin to calling Alistair Carth or Morrigan Bastila.

Yeah, that's what I thought.

That is part of it. I think another direct comparison comes from HK-47 and Shale both relishing opportunities to indulge in violence and wanton slaughter. They both show little regard for life and tend to advocate might makes right solutions to every problem the protagonist runs across.

Where HK-47 and Shale differ is that Shale gradually realizes that strength comes from who you are, not what you are. HK-47 remains a snarky homicidal sidekick straight to the end. He never sees humanoids as anything more than inferior. Shale also questions everyone's purpose and nature. HK-47 just cracks wise about shooting people and is content with his understanding of Republic and Sith peoples and their societies.

The comparison is strong at a glance. I can see why it's frequently made. But it breaks down quickly when it becomes obvious HK-47 is mere comic relief with virtually no depth to speak of.

[RagingCyclone]

Blacklash93 wrote...

It amuses me how people are threatening to give up on DA just because the series takes a few liberties with the canon in other media that has no effect on their game.

This is just a story Gaider wanted to tell and he isn't going to let few people who feel threatened by an alternate storyline get in the way of that. Just enjoy the lore that these things will bring to the series.

I don't want the fact that Alistair could die in Origins make him a nobody for the rest of the series and I'm sure there are plenty of people who would agree with me. If Bioware has to take some liberties and lose a few fans to do such things, then so be it. That's their loss.

For me the problem lies in that Gaider is reusing old characters. I would prefer using new characters to explore the world of Thedas when using medium outside the game. I've mentioned before to you it isn't about Alistair dying in Origins although you seem to keep keying on that. I just see a larger issue with what is happening.

To help maybe explain this a little better I will use an outside example of what can happen when going too far with the same character.  I am guessing the number in your name is the year you were born which makes you younger and perhaps not as inclined to what I am about to prose on. If I am wrong about the number than I apologize now.

For my generation (I am 40) we had a very solid villain growing up named Darth Vader. For decades the mystery of his fall was intriguing. Then during the 2000's the prequel movies came out that explained the fall of this man...and for many in my generation that fall was anticlimatic and actually diminished the great villain we had grown up with. The mystery was the genius, and the revelation of his fall only served to make many of us forget the series entirely. Why you may ask? Because knowing less was actually better. The mystery was better and kept the character of Darth Vader fresh.  Now for many of us he became nothing more that a cliche...the man behind the mask was the villain we feared...the unknown. Once Lucas unmasked him, and the foolish way the man fell...the man behind the mask became much less scary and for some of us almost comical.

Translate that now into DA.  A little mystery here and there is a good thing. I know you would like to see more on these characters...but the mystery of what has happened to them is what keeps them alive. The mystery kept Darth Vader alive for decades.  I believe that mystery about these characters can be a good thing.  You keep mentioning, with some other posters, that this will not be canon...but when it's written by the head writer it is essentially canon. No amount of spin or word play or exposition changes the perception that when a writer of a series of books, comic, games, continutes to write about a character or world those things become what the general fanbase takes as canon. Fan fiction is just that FAN FICTION...it has no real or lasting effect on the genre as a whole. But the lead writer writing about these things...whether stated or not...becomes canon because of who the writer is.

This is pretty much my last saying on this. I could care less one way or the other what happens to the characters Gaider is writing about, but there is a larger feeling of discontent that appears at the surface. My problem is that instead of expanding on a world with new characters which has soooo much potential to broaden interest and give new perspectives into the world of DA...instead we are going to see it in through the eyes of the same people we have seen over and over. Sure we get some lore...but at the same perspective we have in the games. And now that Alistair is king...how long before the main man and hero for many in the DA universe will become diminished like the old villian from my youth?

[Blacklash93]

@Shadow of Light Dragon

I think Bioware has dug a hole in how Dragons are percieved in DA so far that they're not going to be able to just jump out of it. They're not just going to be able to say "Turns out every dragon is magical and are scheming shapeshifters! Problem?" If that were true we would have seen it earlier and the writers wouldn't have said otherwise when speaking about dragons generally.

I do want to see some special, intelligent dragons, but I'd also like DA to mostly keep its uniqueness in its conception of the mythical species as animals. That doesn't mean, however, that there can't be a nature to dragons that we don't know of that doesn't take away from that uniqueness. Dragon blood, dragon cults, and Old Gods have been hinting at this since the series started.

Dragons being a "fallen" race has been one of my theories for ages. I'd be satisfied with it, personally. Just as long as most dragons still love to eat people like edible, crunchy ketchup packets.

Modifié par Blacklash93, 17 octobre 2011 - 07:13 .

[Darker_than_black]

[quote]Blacklash93 wrote...

Gaider also said at one point before Origins came out that there would be no golem like HK-47. Then we had Shale.[/quote]

I don't know anything about HK-47, so please forgive my ignorance here...how was Shale similar, besides being a construct? 
[/quote]

[quote]Herr Uhl wrote...
The similarity is likely from her regarding anything not golem as squishy, kind of like HK-47 and meatbags.

There is difference in character though. It is akin to calling Alistair Carth or Morrigan Bastila. [/quote]

They are also similair in that they are both quite cynical personalities with a morbid sense of humour. They both talk about killing "fleshy things" or "meatbags" just for the amusment. Also, they both dislike having a "master" to obey, or at least they both dislike using the term "master".

But as has allready been pointed out, developers can change their minds and they can create new stories with complete disregard of choices in earlier instalments. It's just how the branch works.

Edit: The "quote system" on this forum seems to like annoying me.

Modifié par Darker_than_black, 17 octobre 2011 - 01:30 .

[tmp7704]

kyles3 wrote...

My point is that I think they're limiting the amount of impact their stories can have. Can I be moved by the death of a character whose fate I determine? Sure. But it doesn't have the  "gut-punch" quality that the writers have told us that they look for.

I disagree -- just see how many people were upset at things Alistair did in their games even though it was only one playthrough and they're perfectly able to get different outcome.

I understand you don't view it in this way, but there appears to be large group who do, and for them the 'amount of impact' presented in such story isn't going to be an issue.

At the same time, take into account that trying to increase that 'amount of impact' of the story for people who attach excessive value to whether something is 'canon' or not by saying "this is canon, deal with it" can very well drastically affect the amount of impact the games can have, for these canon-oriented people. Because when the 'canon' gets defined then everything that doesn't match that 'canon' "didn't happen" and as such "lacks the gut-punch" and so "why should i bother", according to the line of reasoning you presented. And since BioWare is a game company first, well.

Modifié par tmp7704, 17 octobre 2011 - 03:18 .

[tmp7704]

RagingCyclone wrote...

For me the problem lies in that Gaider is reusing old characters.

Except Varric (and to extent Isabela, being created much anew) are new characters, introduced in the sequel to the first game. I don't think it's really a problem if such character makes then another appearance -- to use your own analogy, is it a problem that Empire Strikes Back has largely the same cast the first Star Wars movie did?

Modifié par tmp7704, 17 octobre 2011 - 03:27 .