49 réponses à ce sujet

[Nyreen]

Would you prefer a single protagonist for the Dragon Age series to follow over a new one each title? Yes, I'm aware that Laidlaw has already alluded to there being a new player character every game, but I want the forum's opinion.

Here is a poll so we can get some numbers.

Personally I like following one character. I know it creates problems, (import bugs, to keep or replace the cast of characters, plot restrictions, etc), but I love following Shepard as she saves the universe. It's an amazing experience to create and mold your own character over the course of several games. However, I'm not speaking of Hawke when I suggest this. (Honestly, I found female Hawke's voice too cold and pretentious.) Plus, I think many of us mourned the fact we were restricted to one race in this sequel. Perhaps DA3 will remedy that.

Modifié par Celestina, 25 novembre 2011 - 07:22 .

[MKDAWUSS]

Protagonist is a relative term, but if you're referring to a new player character each go vs. recurring player character, it honestly depends on the story. I know I thought bringing in Hawke for DA2 felt too soon to do so (the series wasn't established enough yet at the time), but now in regards to the future, I'm OK with it either way. If we have recurring player characters, it probably limits you to that particular engine as you have things like appearance to worry about (unless your character is hammered into a makeover that either receives or doesn't receive an explanation).

[Plaintiff]

Generally I don't mind either way, but since Dragon Age has already indicated the direction it's heading in, I'd like to see a new protagonist in every game. I feel like it opens up more possibilities in terms of where the story can take us.

Hawke starts out as a blank slate and is fully developed by the end of the game. While some details may be fleshed out or wrapped up in DLC, I feel that his story is essentially over. I want to move on from him and create someone new.

[SkittlesKat96]

I think Bioware should just alternate or be flexible...say maybe have Hawke in two games, then the next character in one game, then if necessary there might be a character that will be in three games or something (although it would have to be a well loved character and not a boring character to last three games.)

[dsl08002]

There are many pro and cons for a single protaganist

In my opnion there would be better to have a single protaganist because:

1) hero story from the beginning to the end
2) speciall conversation options that you wouldn´t have otherwise with an npc
3) Easier than start from scratch when you have a set character
4) more involved in the story line
5) More connected to the companion or other characters
6) previous action feels more personal.
7) Character created to your image, not the same thing when you create a new character (thinking of DAO then play as a new one in DA2)


Cons
1) storyline is only viewed from one hero
2) certain point of view
3)........

tell you the truth i think that some games should have a single protaganist but if it would be a new protaganist then the story for the previous hero must end, I cant speak for everyone but i think that after the expansion and all the other dlc in DAO, the wardens story is still open and is ready to begin a new adventure. ( those that didn´t make US)

[AlexXIV]

Single, but the choice is already made. New protagonist in every new game.

[Teddie Sage]

Yes and I want it to be Hawke. I don't really want anyone else. I don't mind if it's becoming more like Mass Effect, I just want more of my Hawke.

[RavenB]

I would rather have a new character each time, but they also need more closure. I don't feel like The Warden got closure for their story and it's looking doubtful that Hawke will either.

[HiroVoid]

New character.

[Fox In The Box]

I prefer having a new protagonist each time. That way, I'm not tied down to the personality and appearance of my previous character and that allows for more freedom as far as character creation goes. Besides, the game itself shapes my characters as much as I do, which gives the devs more freedom to tell the story they want to tell. I doubt that someone like the almighty Warden would work for the story as it is in Dragon Age 2.

[saMoorai]

I imagine we'll get a new Protagonist, however I would be ecstatic if Hawke returned as the main character.

[dsl08002]

Another thing that would be good i you could choose to play as either warden,hawke or new protaganist in DA3.

Sadly they have announced that it would be a new one...... so far

[dsl08002]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

dsl08002 wrote...

Another thing that would be good i you could choose to play as either warden,hawke or new protaganist in DA3.

Sadly they have announced that it would be a new one...... so far

That would be virtually impossible to do.

Nothing is impossible!!

[Heimdall]

New protagonist

I like having a new character with different stories, The Warden's was about the Blight, Hawke's was about the beginning of the Mage Templar War. Shepard's by comparison is about a single struggle against the Reapers stretching multiple games. I like that too, but changing protagonists let's Bioware tell many different stories.

Not to mention, it makes carrying decisions over easier since they don't have to worry about what other characters think of the protagonist for the actions of the last game.

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 26 novembre 2011 - 10:19 .

[Heimdall]

dsl08002 wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

dsl08002 wrote...

Another thing that would be good i you could choose to play as either warden,hawke or new protaganist in DA3.

Sadly they have announced that it would be a new one...... so far

That would be virtually impossible to do.

Nothing is impossible!!

Beyond reasonable cost then.

[Sidney]

I don't mind the "new" character. I mean you go back to the old Fallouts (well even FO3) and each one was a new vault dweller and that was fine. KoTOR was 2 different protagonists and other than the rush job on 2 there was nothing wrong with that arrangement.

Plus in pure game terms it is easier on continuity, you don't have the "amnesia" issue from ME2 to deflate characters and so on. Obviously BG1/2 and ME1/2 showed you could do continuity but it isn't a necessity.

[Darius Vir]

Single.

Get to know character, invest in character...character disappears. Start new character. Rinse and repeat, apparently.  I certainly don't feel misled, or that Bioware owes anyone anything because they never "promised" a single protagonist.  But it's made the experience a bit less enjoyable as a whole.

I LOVE the Dragon Age series, I really do. But this seriously bothers me.

Modifié par Darius Vir, 27 novembre 2011 - 04:11 .

[ohnotherancor]

For Dragon Age, I prefer new characters for each installment as long as the old characters don't always mysteriously disappear.

I don't want to finish Dragon Age V and hear "Oh no, Protagonist 5 has disappeared just like the Warden, Hawke, Protagonist 3, and Protagonist 4!"

But I like the idea of focusing on myriad areas of Thedas and seeing those areas through different characters' eyes.

[frostajulie]

I think part of the problem with DA2 was calling it DA2 and making us think it was a sequal. It would have been better marketed as a new game set in the DA universe since that is what it was. On those merits it was a great game and with that marketing it would have done better. I stayed away until it was $20 because it was marketed as a sequel but I could not play my Warden and many of my Wardens choices were ignored or bugged on import. But after playing it I was very happy to realize it was a completely different story that simply took place in the same world. I grew to love it after that... except for the lack of romance flags importing correctly.

Since the story in DA is changing I like a new protagonist in every game, however if the next game is focusing on the mage templar conflict I would prefer to play as Hawke since it was her story started this conflict

[Riknas]

Every time I read this title I think, "Why would I want to play a character that's already married or dating?":?

Then I remember, and feel like an idiot.

That said, I like the "new hero" concept each game.

[Heimdall]

frostajulie wrote...

I think part of the problem with DA2 was calling it DA2 and making us think it was a sequal. It would have been better marketed as a new game set in the DA universe since that is what it was. On those merits it was a great game and with that marketing it would have done better. I stayed away until it was $20 because it was marketed as a sequel but I could not play my Warden and many of my Wardens choices were ignored or bugged on import. But after playing it I was very happy to realize it was a completely different story that simply took place in the same world. I grew to love it after that... except for the lack of romance flags importing correctly.

Since the story in DA is changing I like a new protagonist in every game, however if the next game is focusing on the mage templar conflict I would prefer to play as Hawke since it was her story started this conflict

Unavoidably the mage Templar conflict is going to be big in DA3.  However the point of Hawke's story was the start of the conflict.  The Start.  End of line.  I have a feeling both Hawke and the Warden are going to end up having an important off screen role in the end of the conflict anyway.  We know DA3 is going to have a new protagonist at any rate.  So speaketh Laidlaw.

I guess when I hear sequel i don't automatically think of something intimately connected to the prior instalment like some people do, I just don't understand that expectation.  I just think "the story that came after" when I hear sequel.  That doesn't even mean it includes the same characters.  Maybe I've just read too many books with sequels that take place years later and have 90% of the cast dead.  Most of those were also series that promoted themselves as being about telling stories within a setting rather than about a character or telling a larger story through multiple characters.  That's something Bioware has not been shy about at all.  It is a proper sequel.  It was never promoted as the sequel to the Warden's story, it was promoted as the next chapter of the story of the Dragon Age.  Ergo, calling it DA2 is  entirely valid.



I started ranting, I'm sorry

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 28 novembre 2011 - 03:19 .

[Sidney]

Lord Aesir wrote...
I guess when I hear sequel i don't automatically think of something intimately connected to the prior instalment like some people do, I just don't understand that expectation.  I just think "the story that came after" when I hear sequel.  That doesn't even mean it includes the same characters.  Maybe I've just read too many books with sequels that take place years later and have 90% of the cast dead.  Most of those were also series that promoted themselves as being about telling stories within a setting rather than about a character or telling a larger story through multiple characters.  That's something Bioware has not been shy about at all.  It is a proper sequel.  It was never promoted as the sequel to the Warden's story, it was promoted as the next chapter of the story of the Dragon Age.  Ergo, calling it DA2 is  entirely valid.



I started ranting, I'm sorry

They've always said DA is about the Dragon Age not about a character whereas Mass Effect is about Shep. Two different appraoch and both can work just fine.

Honestly I would have been more satisfied with the "end" of the Warden if they'd not had the DLC. Witch Hunt left things way, way too "unended" and too many questions whereas whipping the AD is a good place to end a story.

[Heimdall]

Sidney wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...
I guess when I hear sequel i don't automatically think of something intimately connected to the prior instalment like some people do, I just don't understand that expectation.  I just think "the story that came after" when I hear sequel.  That doesn't even mean it includes the same characters.  Maybe I've just read too many books with sequels that take place years later and have 90% of the cast dead.  Most of those were also series that promoted themselves as being about telling stories within a setting rather than about a character or telling a larger story through multiple characters.  That's something Bioware has not been shy about at all.  It is a proper sequel.  It was never promoted as the sequel to the Warden's story, it was promoted as the next chapter of the story of the Dragon Age.  Ergo, calling it DA2 is  entirely valid.



I started ranting, I'm sorry

They've always said DA is about the Dragon Age not about a character whereas Mass Effect is about Shep. Two different appraoch and both can work just fine.

Honestly I would have been more satisfied with the "end" of the Warden if they'd not had the DLC. Witch Hunt left things way, way too "unended" and too many questions whereas whipping the AD is a good place to end a story.

I agree, but it was the outcry of those that felt Morrigan's story was too unfinished and it had to absolutely be the Warden they played as when this happened that brought about the Witch Hunt DLC.  They felt the story was too unresolved and were quite vocal about it.  Damned if they do damned if they don't.

I was mostly responding to the idea that DA2 shouldn't have been called a sequel anyway.