135 réponses à ce sujet

[csfteeeer]

Arken wrote...


1) Bioware has made yet another retcon and the Warden survives the first game regardless of our actions.

There is no Retcon, as it's only a Possibility.

i strongly support the idea of canonizing the Warden's status, it can either be dead or alive, but it has to be canonized, because a GOOD writer knows that the survival of a potentially important character is not to be left within the players Hands,Just like the ME team Canonized Shepard's Survival.

And, for that matter, they should also canonize the warden's action, so that the players decisions won't be a problem.

Just like, For example, the Fallout Writing team canonized the Vault Dweller's Actions and Gender(as he is ALWAYS your Grandfather in Fallout 2).

EDIT: oh, and they already did a similar thing.
It's Called Awakening.

and they also Canonized Leliana's Survival.

so yeah, theres no excuse for the story to NOT have a canonization, as they have already done, and unless they start making decisions TRULY matter(BETWEEN GAMES), leaving it like this might just hurt the series.

Modifié par csfteeeer, 26 octobre 2011 - 10:48 .

[AlexXIV]

Depends how you do it. I wasn't finished with my Warden before they ripped her from my grasp, same with Hawke. I don't know what's so hard about finishing one story before starting a new. Especially if you don't see your characters again anyway because of some art change.

[csfteeeer]

AlexXIV wrote...

Depends how you do it. I wasn't finished with my Warden before they ripped her from my grasp, same with Hawke. I don't know what's so hard about finishing one story before starting a new. Especially if you don't see your characters again anyway because of some art change.

exactly.

If they would have left the warden alone in DA2, i would be supporting the idea of not seeing him again.
Why would we?

but they set him/her up, they completely ruin my mind canon and now the story feels unfinished.

you do not finish a MAIN PROTAGONIST story by saying "Well, he mysteriously disappeared...." and nothing else.

I Didn't like it with Revan, i don't like it now.

[Arken]

csfteeeer wrote...

Arken wrote...


1) Bioware has made yet another retcon and the Warden survives the first game regardless of our actions.

There is no Retcon, as it's only a Possibility.

i strongly support the idea of canonizing the Warden's status, it can either be dead or alive, but it has to be canonized,

Only if that is out of the player's hands. Otherwise it's a retcon.

Bioware had the opportunity to make a canon but they decided to go with imports instead. Now they need to either stick with their guns of take the flame.

csfteeeer wrote...
because a GOOD writer knows that the survival of a potentially important character is not to be left within the players Hands,Just like the ME team Canonized Shepard's Survival.

Except the difference is Shepard is the protagonist of the trilogy. The Warden story ended. The Warden is only relevant to a story concerning Darkspawn. The Warden has nothing to do with the mage/templar conflict. The Warden only involved in the affairs of factions in Origins because of the Blight. Without the Blight the Warden is not relevant.

Example would be Awakening. Awakening was loosely relevant, but forced a canon that didn't make sense. A dwarf/elf Warden is in charge of a human city? Why would my Warden want to be in charge of Amaranthine. It made sense for the Warden to fight the Blight. I understood why the Warden was pushed into that situation.

Awakening only made sense for certain Wardens who wanted to remain in the order and lead the Fereldan Wardens.

If the Warden randomly becomes the Hero of Dragon Age 3 it will feel like pointless fan service. The Warden isn't relevant to the mage/templar conflict. It's fan service.

I also think that a lot of Mass Effect 2's plot had very dumb and pointless moments. The introduction is an example and the fact that Shepard can die during the Suicide Mission. In a game which is about choices don't give us a choice which is pointless.

csfteeeer wrote...
And, for that matter, they should also canonize the warden's action, so that the players decisions won't be a problem.

Just like, For example, the Fallout Writing team canonized the Vault Dweller's Actions and Gender(as he is ALWAYS your Grandfather in Fallout 2).

Except they've already established that there is an import.

Can Bioware suddenly remove the import and put a canon. But they'll look spineless for doing so. They just submitted and went backwards. Hard to respect a developer who doesn't stick to their guns and flip flops.

csfteeeer wrote...
EDIT: oh, and they already did a similar thing.
It's Called Awakening.

Which was very irritating.

I don't see why a sacrificed Warden couldn't import their save without undoing their choice. Couldn't they have easily had the Orlesian Warden for Wardens who died? It would have been easier then undoing our past choice just so the dead Warden could import into Awakening.

Anders being in Dragon Age II was very annoying. There was no reason to have Anders as a main character. His role could have easily be done by any other abomination. We didn't need Anders. His presence had no reason other than to try and bridge the two games.

[AlexXIV]

Easiest would have been, Warden dies, no OGB loophole. End of story.

[Nerdage]

They can strengthen the connection between games without using the same protagonist each time, and so long as they can give the protagonist's story a satisfying ending (see: NOT skipping off the face of the planet! Though I may not necessarily want to play the warden again anymore, I have to know what happened/happens) I'll be fine with having a new protagonist each time.

There's so much more they could do than what they did in DA2. Whatever reason they had to release DA2 as early as they did I'm going to assume they won't do it for the next game too, so I suspect there'll be a much stronger sense of continuity between 3 and 2 (and maybe Origins too) than there has been between 2 and Origins.

Modifié par nerdage, 26 octobre 2011 - 11:23 .

[TEWR]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Only reason I will miss Hawke is Nicholas Boulton.

There's always Malcolm Hawke's spectral incarnations! They can pop up anywhere because Malcolm Hawke is just that badass!

[Big I]

What I worry about is diluting the epicness of the characters. The Warden and Hawke are basically "epic heroes". They do stuff like kill high dragons and Flemeth/Corypheus. They're like Hercules or Beowulf in the context of Thedas. Presumably each subsequent protagonist will also fit into the same mold, with their heroic deeds equalling or exceeding that of the previous ones. How long until Thedas has a half dozen or more legendary heroes running around, and what will that do to the plot?

[AlexXIV]

LookingGlass93 wrote...

What I worry about is diluting the epicness of the characters. The Warden and Hawke are basically "epic heroes". They do stuff like kill high dragons and Flemeth/Corypheus. They're like Hercules or Beowulf in the context of Thedas. Presumably each subsequent protagonist will also fit into the same mold, with their heroic deeds equalling or exceeding that of the previous ones. How long until Thedas has a half dozen or more legendary heroes running around, and what will that do to the plot?

You mean you don't like Heroes'R'Us? You can have a 5 pack for 9.99.

[Nerdage]

Hawke and the warden aren't unique as heroes of their type; Maric, Calenhad, the Black Fox, Dane, and those are just some human/fereldan stories.

[PrinceTrase]

I don't think it's a bad thing.

It's a fresh start for those who are entering the series as newcomers.  Plus, there's nothing wrong with seeing a fresh face for those who have played the series before.

[whykikyouwhy]

A think that a new protagonist per DA game is a good thing. It fully supports my theory that *someone* is gathering heroes for *something* that may or may not involve cheese.  

[TEWR]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

A think that a new protagonist per DA game is a good thing. It fully supports my theory that *someone* is gathering heroes for *something* that may or may not involve cheese.  

I can just see this certain "someone" ordering them all to raid a mansion and steal all the cheese inside for a.... uh... "magic" ritual that will end the chaos.

[whykikyouwhy]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

whykikyouwhy wrote...

A think that a new protagonist per DA game is a good thing. It fully supports my theory that *someone* is gathering heroes for *something* that may or may not involve cheese.  

I can just see this certain "someone" ordering them all to raid a mansion and steal all the cheese inside for a.... uh... "magic" ritual that will end the chaos.

That *someone* would not need to raid any place for cheese. Nooo...rather, the collected would be on hand to slice and serve the fromage that has already been procured. They would be epic cheese servers of awesomeness.

[jlb524]

AlexXIV wrote...
Depends how you do it. I wasn't finished with my Warden before they ripped her from my grasp, same with Hawke. I don't know what's so hard about finishing one story before starting a new. Especially if you don't see your characters again anyway because of some art change.

I still hope they plan on adding closure to Hawke's story (expansion pack).

I'm fine with new characters every story but agree that they should provide satisfying closure for the old ones.

[csfteeeer]

Arken wrote...

csfteeeer wrote...

Arken wrote...


1) Bioware has made yet another retcon and the Warden survives the first game regardless of our actions.

There is no Retcon, as it's only a Possibility.

i strongly support the idea of canonizing the Warden's status, it can either be dead or alive, but it has to be canonized,

Only if that is out of the player's hands. Otherwise it's a retcon.

Bioware had the opportunity to make a canon but they decided to go with imports instead. Now they need to either stick with their guns of take the flame.

Theres a Difference between being Ballsy, and stupid.
and no they don't, since nothing important came from the transfer of files.
but i'll address it more in depth later.

csfteeeer wrote...
because a GOOD writer knows that the survival of a potentially important character is not to be left within the players Hands,Just like the ME team Canonized Shepard's Survival.

Except the difference is Shepard is the protagonist of the trilogy. The Warden story ended. The Warden is only relevant to a story concerning Darkspawn. The Warden has nothing to do with the mage/templar conflict. The Warden only involved in the affairs of factions in Origins because of the Blight. Without the Blight the Warden is not relevant.

that wasn't my point.
My point was that the status of an important character is not to be left within the players, if you plan on making them relevant in the future, that is, and they keep saying that the warden is an important character and that we may actually see a Warden/Hawke crossover.

and BTW, ME2 didn't needed Shepard for any other reason than "Well, he/she is.... Special", everything would have been exactly the same if Shepard Remained Dead after the Normandy attack.

and they keep him/her because "(S)He's Special", then why Wouldn't the warden be "Special"?

and while you could say that Shepard's Status as savior of the citadel as well as his connections from ME1 would make him special enough, Shepard was death FOR 2 YEARS, any relevance he might have had would have vanished already, as he was declared death.

if things like, say, his visions from ME1 mattered, then it would have made sense.

but hey, if that's perfectly fine simply because "Shepard was planned to be protagonist all the time" while ignoring every other possibilty, then why not the warden or Hawke(note: i DON'T want to see Hawke again)

Example would be Awakening. Awakening was loosely relevant, but forced a canon that didn't make sense. A dwarf/elf Warden is in charge of a human city? Why would my Warden want to be in charge of Amaranthine. It made sense for the Warden to fight the Blight. I understood why the Warden was pushed into that situation.

Similar to ME2, like i said, as Shepard Wasn't needed, everything would have been exactly the same if another protagonist took the main role after Shepard's Death at the beginning.

If the Warden randomly becomes the Hero of Dragon Age 3 it will feel like pointless fan service. The Warden isn't relevant to the mage/templar conflict. It's fan service.

Just like Involving Leliana into the hole thing was probably just fan service.
but i'll address this more in depth later on.

and besides, as a little off topic point, doing that certainly wouldn't be any less dumb than making character look unique just For Cosplayers (yes, they actually said that)

csfteeeer wrote...
And, for that matter, they should also canonize the warden's action, so that the players decisions won't be a problem.

Just like, For example, the Fallout Writing team canonized the Vault Dweller's Actions and Gender(as he is ALWAYS your Grandfather in Fallout 2).

Except they've already established that there is an import.

Can Bioware suddenly remove the import and put a canon. But they'll look spineless for doing so. They just submitted and went backwards. Hard to respect a developer who doesn't stick to their guns and flip flops.

Well, again, they could have let Leliana or Anders die, but no.
and that's not a good excuse, as the only thing that we get out of those transfers are a bunch of lame NPCs commenting on what happened, nothing else.
It wouldn't matter if you didn't import anything.
So why would this be a problem?
had the warden's actions altered DA2, then yes, i would understand.

Anders being in Dragon Age II was very annoying. There was no reason to have Anders as a main character. His role could have easily be done by any other abomination. We didn't need Anders. His presence had no reason other than to try and bridge the two games.

i agree with this.

But still though,(and addressing one of your previous questions) his ark made sense, in the context that at least he was looking for a way to free mages, and he finished the job in DA2.

i still don't really think it was necessary, but i don't care as long as it makes sense, and i think it did this time.

Modifié par csfteeeer, 27 octobre 2011 - 12:17 .

[Sylvanpyxie]

Sometimes a single protagonist is the best thing you can do. Having 1 overall story and a new hero dealing with it every year could get very silly, very, very quickly.

If Bioware are going to continue the same underlying plot line from Origins to Dragon Age 8 million and six, with 8 million and six different protagonists i'm going to have to shoot myself.

(note: i DON'T want to see Hawke again)

I do, but only if they make the default male Hawke as hot as the original CGI trailer Hawke.

Modifié par Sylvanpyxie, 27 octobre 2011 - 12:21 .

[csfteeeer]

Sylvanpyxie wrote...

Sometimes a single protagonist is the best thing you can do. Having 1 overall story and a new hero dealing with it every year could get very silly, very, very quickly.

If Bioware are going to continue the same underlying plot line from Origins to Dragon Age 8 million and six, with 8 million and six different protagonists i'm going to have to shoot myself.

this is also one of my points.

they set up Hawke and Warden for something, and the stories are loosely related to them.
So who the hell could this Protagonist be?
Why would he/she be involved?

[Pendragon993]

I would say haveing a new Protaginest would be good,but then DA2 came out sooo...I dont know changeing things might be bad,you cant fix what aint broken

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

I think that new protagonist is probably the best idea for Dragon Age 3.

If they were to use the same protagonist for multiple games, you'd have to excuse the "oh but yur lv 1 again lol" stuff. Which usually means amnesia or lazarus syndrome. They could do when happens in some D&D games and just keep the levels low for the first game and increase them for the follow up.

But I suspect that's no longer popular because everyone wants to be teh ultra hardcore winrar, and you throw any semblance of balance out the window if you fail to scale the enemies and encounters for the first game appropriately. I mean, if you're laying the smackdown on High Dragons at lv 20 in game 1, why would you need to be lv 35 in game 2 to do the same if in the lore, their approximate strength is the same.

Not to mention, I don't believe DA 2's character system has the versatility nor depth to handle multiple games.

So on that note, a new protagonist is a much better idea.

Sylvanpyxie raises a good point though. At what point does having new protagonists and epic heroes become too much for Thedas? If you have half a dozen guys running around who can slay Archdemons and High Dragons without significant cost (gameplay or story wise), it becomes harder to sell the idea that the Archdemons, Blights, Old Gods, High Dragons, Mage/Templar Wars etc are actually these big, insurmountable challenges.

Modifié par mrcrusty, 27 octobre 2011 - 01:01 .

[Drasanil]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Only reason I will miss Hawke is Nicholas Boulton.

There's always Malcolm Hawke's spectral incarnations! They can pop up anywhere because Malcolm Hawke is just that badass!

I refuse to believe that anything with the name Hawke can even approach some remote definition of  badasrse-itude, the simple fact they spawned >insert name here< Hawke with their seed is proof enough of that<_< 

PS: As an aside I'm glad we don't have recurring protagonists for each game, hopefully that means Bioware will restore some form of origin/race choice in DA3. However, if they put in a second human only protag and claim he/she is 'different' from Hawke I simply won't be buying the game until it hits the bargain bin. 

Modifié par Drasanil, 27 octobre 2011 - 01:15 .

[Asch Lavigne]

Different story, different protagonist.

DA is about different things, it wouldn't make sense for one character to be doing everything in Thedas, they're not a superhero.

[Malanek]

Switching main characters is a good thing. It gives developers freedom both with the story and the game system.

[Terraforming]

I never thought that Dragon Age would be the fantasy-version of Mass Effect, so I'm happy that we get a different hero every game.

I do think that the ending to DA2 made it seem like the Warden and/or Hawke would play a role in the next game, which was sort of weird. I'm really not sure where Bioware is going with this series, but I personally think it would be disappointing to just bounce between two heroes when there is still so much to experience in Thedas.

[Zanallen]

I like having a new protagonist with each game. The series is about Thedas first and foremost. A new protagonist with new ties and new companions in new locations should work better in fleshing out Thedas and its lore.